LiveJournal and the Dunbar number

[vaneramos]

Eramosa River yesterday

Christopher Allen suggests social networking services such as LiveJournal overtax our limits for social interaction. There is a practical limit to the number of relationships we can successfully maintain. Anthropologist R.I.M. Dunbar places it around 150.

It doesn't take much imagination to see the validity of this. When my friends list exceeds 100 I experience meltdown. Meaningful interaction with more people is not sustainable. I have to take into account my immediate family, friends and a few other people I maintain contact with online. When peripheral relationships start breaking down or seeming superficial, my overactive sense of integrity kicks in and I freak out.

Allen proposes various mechanisms for keeping our social networks in proportion. In the long run it doesn't pay to attempt augmentation of our Dunbar number. Internet systems might offer tools for identifying and facilitating our most important relationships. Someday they might even automate development of additional relationships, Allen says:

For example, many Cyberpunk novels have suggested the ideas of avatars that can collect information for you on the 'net while your attention is elsewhere. Could these avatars likewise maintain more distant social networks for you, without your full attention? Would that function even be desirable?

What difference does introversion and extroversion make? Introverts seem to prefer a smaller number of higher-quality relationships. Perhaps my Dunbar number is even less than 150.

Then again, certain professionals such as politicians and medical doctors must find mechanisms for maximizing the extent of their relationships. This is probably true for journalists, too. I balk at the challenge of developing and maintaining necessary contacts including sources of information potential writing markets. But not all relationships need to be perpetuated. I can maintain contact long enough to achieve my purpose and then move on. Such opportunism does not come easily to me, so it's important to acknowledge that everyone is in the same situation. Each new contact cannot become a lifelong friend.

I have had to accept this on LiveJournal, too, by limiting the number of people I add to my friends list. But in the long run, even 100 is too high a number of real friends for me to sustain. For a long time I resisted the use of filters to keep up with my close friends; it seemed phony to add someone unless I intended to read their journals regularly.

I've begun to accept that some relationships must be superficial and transitory. A certain limited network is essential for survival, something proportionate to my Dunbar number. And I do not keep anyone on my friends list unless their journals interest me when I have time to read them. But when life becomes too complicated and I risk overextending myself, filters come in handy.

Comments

[lilactime.livejournal.com]

I have filters up the wazoo, and I've only got about 70ish people Friended. I find it incredibly useful in many circumstances, particularly because I have people on my F-list who are lovely, kind, wonderful people... but they just don't write particularly well, or have anything to say that really interests me. So I've made it possible for them to read and post replies to my journal, but I seldom read or post in theirs. That sounds quite eqotistical in a way, but it's not meant to be, it's just something I do to keep my life relatively sane.

Like you, I'm quite the introvert, which is exacerbated by my allergies and chemical sensitivity - even when I want to go out and be social, I can't always do that because of the environment I might find myself in. I'm also terrible at chitchat, small talk or "networking". I totally get where you're coming from about developing and maintaining contacts, whether it's in the field of journalism or any other area - all those people are just so overwhelming.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

I hope we get to meet sometime in a safe environment. My daughters and I spend a lot of time in Toronto because my boyfriend lives there. Marian and I are heading into the city in a few minutes for a regular Sunday night dinner and gathering of friends at his house.

I have the same problem with chitchat. I experimented with Yahoo! Messenger and its ilk, but found chat software too distracting and invasive, besides I couldn't handle more than one person wanting to talk to me at once.

I find a wide range of relationships types on here, too. I initially joined LJ because I knew a couple other writers on here, and had no idea I would encounter such a highly developed gay community. It distracted me for a year or so, in a good way. That's how I met my boyfriend, his partner and their friends.

Now that I'm concentrating on my creative pursuits, I want to devote more energy to my literary and artistic contacts. Fortunately the two groups intersect somewhat. But I am challenged to evaluate my priorities and how to maintain them. Like you, I have friends I value even though I can't afford the time to read their journals consistently. One habit I adopted a while ago is always replying to people's comments. It ensures some reciprocity.

[vaysha.livejournal.com]

I think the thing that saves me is that of all the people on my friends list perhaps 50- 70 of them post with any frequency. There are some who travel and or do not have computers in their homes and post only once every two months and some whom are only posting on weekends. I also find livejournal has a pulse, similar to a tide, people are close and then move away, live some and then come back to record it.

I was happy to hear you do not use filters. I have some private filters for topics people havve asked to be a part of but I read my entire friends page and found the use of filters an odd concept unless one wanted to have a filter strictly for communities they read.

Good morning.
:)

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Actually, as I mentioned at the end of the post, I do use filters for reading. I resisted it for a long time for reasons that we would probably agree on. But all but a very few of the people on my friends list post frequently, at least several times a week. In fact there are about 75-100 posts per day. The fact that a few of them are photographers and I have a dial-up connection exacerbates the problem. When I get busier, such as when my daughters are visiting, it becomes unmanageable. But there are a few people on my friends list whose journals I don't want to miss reading for various reasons: my boyfriend and his household, several other friends I frequently see face-to-face, and a handful of others. Creating a filter was the only practical way for me to stay current with them. It also reminds me that I have to make priorities, even though I might not like them.

Your metaphor about the tide is very apt. It still sometimes confuses me, but I am learning to ride with it.

[vaysha.livejournal.com]

that makes sense and is also handy for communities that have pictures as well.
:)

[eloquentwthrage.livejournal.com]

I think you're overanalyzing a tad here, but from what I know of you, if you didn't, then there would be something wrong.

Personally, I have a smaller Friends list merely out of necessity. I prefer to read my Friends page regularly, and too many Friends means the page is sometimes unwieldy and it is not convenient. Aside from that, at least half the people on my Friends list are people I know in real life. The others I have gotten to know randomly here and there. And I look at my Friends list at least once a month just to verify there are no cling-on's, so to speak. One thing I use to judge after I add someone is whether they contribute to my journal at all. If they're not interested in anything I have to say, then I'm not so interested in what they're saying.

I do use filters because there are some people I just don't want reading certain things I write. Either they are new to my Friends list so I don't know them so well, or I won't appreciate what they have to say in reply. That seems silly, maybe even shallow, but when I talk about gay rights, gay marriage, etc., I don't need the very few Republicans on my list telling me that no gay marriage is for the good of humanity as we know it. I can turn on the television in my house if I want to hear that; I don't need that shit in my journal. Plus they generally write that stuff in their journals anyway, and it's bad enough it has to be on my Friends page.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Overanalyzing, you think? Writing about it is one way I use to explore an idea that interests me.

More likely I am too self-absorbed (and this I freely admit). I try to write about a topic like this to take myself out of my head, but sometimes it doesn't work.

My friends list is a little long partly because I have a few people on there who are simply good reading (or good viewing) and I don't necessarily interact with them very often.

[eloquentwthrage.livejournal.com]

Of course, if writing helps you explore and takes you out of your head, I wouldn't dream of telling you to stop.

[willowing.livejournal.com]

this is highly fascinating and I agree much with it

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Glad to see a comment from you. I missed you yesterday. And yes, please keep me on your list.

[poetbear.livejournal.com]

i'm frozen by looking at your picture.
it wouldn't be you, if you weren't
overanalyzing things. ~paul

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Paul, that's sweet of you.

Despite the ice and snow, it was an extraordinarily mild day for early February. Part of me wants the weather to continue that way.

[jwg.livejournal.com]

I seem to tend to not post a lot (I'd like to do more so I should get a bit more organized about this as you have) and don't comment in journals too much. I do look at friends of friends a lot when I read their comments in friends but have been reluctant to add many people to my friends list.

What bothers me is how I have lost touch with other people with whom I have been involved in the near and distant past. I've always been pretty bad at this.

At the other end of the spectrum, I must say I am often amazed at how politicians keep track of so many people. I know quite a few city councillors and school committee people as well as my state senator and it is astounding how much they know about a huge array of people. Of course since they have to be salespeople of themselves all the time to raise money and get votes this is a necessary attribute.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Check out the article I referenced near the beginning of this post. Allen mentions some of the techniques politicians and salespeople use for remembering so many people. I'm considering adopting some kind of system for keeping tabs on my important relationships, because I have a bad habit of letting them slide.

[jwg.livejournal.com]

I did look at his web site. It did a nice job of describing the evolution of software and research in this field over a long period of time.

I was a CSCW researcher for a few years in the early 90s and designed and built some software to facility review and inspection of software and documents for dispersed workgroups to replace a process normally done in meeting rooms. Interestingly, one of the problems we had was that people missed the side conversations, facial expressions, etc. that happened in face-to-face meetings - in other words a piece of the social networking was missing. This is similar to what happens when people converse in Usenet newsgroups or have email based meetings. It has been astounding how well LJ works in that there is little flaming and much more consideration of how the reader will react.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

How very interesting! I have frequently encountered that problem in internet communication, but you're right, it isn't as prevalent on LiveJournal, at least in my circle of friends. I do see that kind of drama happening here peripherally, but personally I head for the hills whenever I encounter it. You might have managed to avoid it by relating mostly with people you have already known for a while. Maybe it helps that on LJ we can pick and choose whose journals we read rather than everything being posted to an email distribution where everyone in the community must read it or consciously filter it. In other words each person can custom design his or her own group.

[artricia.livejournal.com]

What a great post.

One thing I'm thinking is that there are levels of friends -- some folks I maybe send a card to at Christmas, and want to get that yearly picture that shows me how old their kids have gotten. I like them, but life has limits. Others are closer, and I feel I want to keep touch with them.

This summer, a friend of mine from college travelled the US for about 3 months and only stayed in a hotel a couple of times. He visited about 80 friends and acquaintances. I hadn't been in more that Christmas-card style contact with him for a while, but was really thrilled to see him, to reminisce, and to talk intimately.
Part of that was because we had a history of veing closer, when we lived in the same dorm. But also, I think we can maintain stores of friendships that we don't do much with, but can avail ourselves of when the need or desire presents itself.

I tend to feel like I'm imposing when I do that kind of thing, but often, I think people are rather happy to be thought of, remembered, liked.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

That sounds like a fantastic way to travel. I wish I had more guts when it came to imposing on people that way. A product of my social anxiety is that when communication flags for a certain period of time I feel disconnected, forgotten or even rejected. As a child I always felt like an outsider at school, and sometimes even in my family. Counteracting that persistent perception is a challenge for me.

Did you see the quote from the scifi novel, Geodesica: Ascent? It's two-thirds of the way through the post:

http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2005/02/dunbar_triage_t.html

This causes me to consider strategies I might adopt to make sure I'm taking full advantage of my Dunbar number.

[roosterbear.livejournal.com]

When my friends list exceeds 100 I experience meltdown.

I can relate. I also use filters quite a bit myself, for this very reason (among others). And in certain parts of the year, like now especially, even then I can't keep up with the ones that really matter to me.

I know of some people who maintain friends lists that number in the hundreds, and that just boggles me.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

I know what you mean about "certain parts of the year." This winter has been a lot better for me than last, but I've still felt like giving up a couple times. The past couple days I've been thinking about setting up a system so I can check that I'm maintaining a few of the important relationships, because I know how tempting it is to neglect them sometimes. The article referenced software that could be used, but there's no reason why I can't just keep a chart in my daytimer. I hate to make it too systematic, but sometimes I need the extra nudge.