Social networks: It's not just the Dunbar numbers that make sense

The mobile community has given more contact, but it may not give us a higher level of communication, but it does not necessarily increase our intimacy, but also stimulates the nature of social intercourse, but it can flatten our ability to communicate. Social happiness comes from social quality rather than quantity, from the depth of communication rather than the frequency. I've always wanted to explore the inner rules of mobile social, but I'm just a craftsman who can only comb through some of the numbers I've learned, some of the numbers you might encounter in mobile social, especially the Dunbar number.

1

In terms of UGC, only 1% of users generally produce content, while 99% of users are consumers.

2

-

The relationship is roughly divided into two types: strong and weak relationships. Two person establishes the contact, if is not equal, is like the barber Tiaozi incensed, the activity generally maintains to 2 weeks, then will be attributed to the silence. If two people are equal and appreciate each other, the active interaction will be far beyond 2 weeks. Social media is strong because of the ability to amplify weak relationships, and the maintenance of weak relationships is 0 cost. Birds of a feather, flock together. In the 1954, sociologists proposed two types of homogeneity: identity homogeneity and the homogeneity of value. The difference lies in plasticity, the change of identity homogeneity is slow, and the value homogeneity is changing with the speed of Internet. Curiosity is related to the number of D1 dopamine receptors in the brain, making the possibility of forming a connection appear Shuangfeng shape.

3

People's social attributes determine the sense of belonging to the organization, whether formal organizations or informal organizations, the 3-tuple is the most stable, therefore, the more active and intimate links between friends, the less the group's number, the more stable. Connection strength of 0.3 weak relationship is very stable, strong relationship is less visible, need a complete consensus, of course, blood relationship is built-in strong relationship.

7

The strongest relationship is immediate family and close friends, the most intimate and credible person. The average size of this intimate group is 7, the same size as the capacity of human working memory. In general, mobile social networks have a mutation critical point of 7%, and a network density of 7%, the growth of mobile social networks is changed from linear to exponential. In that year, Facebook broke down at a tipping point of 6%. If a mobile social network fails to reach critical mass for a certain amount of time, its adoption rate begins to decline and eventually dies.

21st

There is a kind of strong relationship, that is collateral and friends, the average of this group is 21, sworn friend outside of friends attributed to this category.

35

The average of the partners is 35, including colleagues, socially interacting friends and strangers circles, distant relatives.

60

Other people who know the average are about 60, and many of the mobile social products based on strangers position the user.

150

This is the Dunbar number, suggested by Robin Dunbar, an anthropologist at Oxford University in the UK, that the size of the cerebral cortex is limited, and that the ability to provide cognitive capacity can only maintain a stable relationship with about 150 people, the number of Robin Dunbar that people have with whom they have a relationship. In other words, people may have 150 friends, or even more "friends" of social networking sites, but only the "inner circle" of about 150 people in real life. The "inner circle" friend in this theory refers to people who have contacted at least once a year.

How many more numbers do we not know?

Social networks: It's not just the Dunbar numbers that make sense