Dunbar & World of Warcraft
In my initial blog entry on the Dunbar Number I presented some statistics on group sizes based on the online game Ultimata Online. In it you could clearly see the power-law (pareto) curve, with diminishing returns at around 150, with most groups being 60 in size:
More recently, Nick Yee and other researchers at the PlayOn Blog have been researching the behaviors of players in the popular World of Warcraft online game. At my request, they sampled guild sizes over a one-week period, and prepared similar graphs:
Overall, these statistics still support my original hypothesis in my Dunbar Number post that mean group sizes will be smaller than 150 for non-survival oriented groups:
This all leads me to hypothesize that the optimal size for active group members for creative and technical groups -- as opposed to exclusively survival-oriented groups, such as villages -- hovers somewhere between 25-80, but is best around 45-50. Anything more than this and the group has to spend too much time "grooming" to keep group cohesion, rather then focusing on why the people want to spend the effort on that group in the first place -- say to deliver a software product, learn a technology, promote a meme, or have fun playing a game. Anything less than this and you risk losing critical mass because you don't have requisite variety.
Interestingly, the diminishing returns for large groups in World of Warcraft appear to cut off much sooner then they do in Ultima Online, with the 95th percentile 54 and the 99th percentile being 110. When I asked about why the 'knee' was much closer to 50 rather than Ultima Online's knee around 150, Raph Koster (the game designer who gave me the original Ultima Online data) answered that it might be because Ultima Online used a "veteran member" method of counting. This could result in under reporting of new users and thus pushing up sizes of more established groups.
Also different was the fact that the World of Warcraft guild sizes display a reverse power-law, with the smallest groups being much more common, rather then the bell curve of Ultima Online. If one-person guilds are excluded, the average guild size was 16.8, the median was 9. This seems to correspond much closer to my thoughts on a smaller 'nodal' threshold for group size that I've observed at around 15, which I describe in Dunbar, Altruistic Punishment, and Meta-Moderation.
My guess is that there is something about Worlds of Warcraft such that even participating in very small groups can be useful, whereas for Ultima Online the utility is gained mainly by sharing the resources earned by larger groups. Thus Worlds of Warcraft has groups that are "bands" as well as "tribes", while with Ultima Online groups are more llikely to be just "tribes".
I've not had time to play Worlds of Warcraft yet, so I'm curious if those who have more experience would agree with my hypothesis.
Some other posts about the Dunbar Number and group size issues:
Posted on August 3, 2005 at 04:01 PM in Games, Recreation, Social Software, Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack
Cheers: Belongingness and Para-Social Relationships
In yesterday's All Things Considered, NPR commentator Jake Halpern questions why you feel like you have a relationship with the characters in your favorite TV shows. His answer: "That's because you do." This idea is interesting not just to help us understand how we relate to imaginary characters, but also to correlate with our own understanding of Dunbar Number relationship limits and how they might relate to this concept.
In his commentary, Bostonian Jake Halpern considers two academic ideas, "belongingness theory" and "para-social relationships", and how they affect the relationships we develop with television characters. He puts it all in the context of the 1990s TV show Cheers:
"My preoccupation with Cheers the Bar puzzled me until I stumbled upon a rather obscure but quite fascinating academic notion called belongingness theory.The argument goes something like this: in ancient times humans who stuck together increased the chances that they would survive and reproduce. So, when it came time to, say, hunt a large animal, or defend the cave against marauders, groups fared better then the guy on his own. In addition, adults in the group would have been more likely to find mates, reproduce, and raise their children.
The likely result of all this evolutionary selection is the creation of an internal mechanism that makes human beings crave social acceptance. The way I figured it, my irrational fondness for Cheers the Bar was just my belongingness mechanism kicking. I just wanted to be part of the gang."
Belongingness theory seems to have a good scientific basis. In Baumeister & Leary's 1995 paper on Belongingness Theory, The Need to Belong, they stated that in order for belongingness to be considered a fundamental human motivation (as opposed to a want), it would have to be universal, affect a broad range of behaviors, lead to ill effects when thwarted, and elicit goal-oriented behavior designed to satisfy it. They found evidence for all of these.
Personally, I'm quite comfortable with the idea that evolution has encouraged us to have a number of "social emotions", and that these may include a strong desire to belong.
Halpern continues in his commentary with a discussion of para-social relationships:
"And this brings to yet another academic theory, that of para-social relationships. According to academics Horton and Wohl, who originated this concept, television gives viewers the "illusion of a face-to-face relationship with the performer". Gradually over the course of many episodes, viewers come to feel that they 'know' a persona.
...
I totally buy it. After watching dozens of Cheers episodes, I felt as if I knew the personas in the show intimately. In fact there were times when I had seen more of the characters on Cheers then I seen of the people in my own family. So, yeah, I definitely had some para-social relationships going on.
The truth is, we all yearn for companionship. The only problem is, that for many of us, myself included, the notion of a well-functioning family and a welcoming group of friends and co-workers, is occasionally more easily found on television or in the movies, than in life itself.
After all, in order to maintain 'real' relationships, you have to put in a tremendous amount of effort: making phone calls; returning emails; planning weekends together; etc. To maintain para-social relationships, however, all you have to do is flick on the TV.
If I'm being honest with myself, I have to admit that at times, Norm, Cliff, Carla, and Sam have formed, well, a kind of para-family to which I yearn to belong. I suppose that hideously hackneyed as it sounds, it's just like the show's theme song goes: "Sometimes you want to go where everybody knows your name, and they're always glad you came." Only, they don't know your name, and they really don't know you came."
Jake's description of Horton & Wohl's theory on para-social relationships definitely parallels my thoughts in a previous post Dunbar Triage: Too Many Connections where I ask "How do I maintain meaningful relationships with over 300 people?" As Jake said, it's difficult because you have to make the effort: the phone calls, the emails, meeting in person, and all the rest.
However, the concept of having real relationships with television characters might give us enlightenment into some other relationship issues. I personally find it difficult to reconcile the mismatch between my number of connections and my own limits due to the Dunbar Number; intuitively I feel that limiting my television watching can help. This is because these TV relationships are what I call "junk relationships". Sometimes when I talk about the concept of the Dunbar Number, I said that we may have difficulty even reaching the Dunbar limit of 150 people because of the "junk relationships" we maintain.
Does every ongoing para-social relationship with an ongoing series character, such as Cliff on Cheers or Kate on Lost, lower the number of relationships we can have with real people? I believe that this may be so.
And, if so, the answer to maintaining more connections with real people may be simply to turn off the television and tune in the real world instead.
Some related posts about group behavior:
Posted on July 27, 2005 at 04:35 PM in Recreation, Social Software, Television | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Circus Contraption in SF during August
In my review last January of the amazing Seven Fingers of the Hand Circus I talk about why I like circuses that are more raw and intimate, i.e. more "human" then the pretentious and distancing style of Cirque du Soleil. However, I was disappointed that I saw the near-to-last show, so could not send my friends out to go see one of the great performances of the year.
Last night at the recommendation of Mark Finnern I went to see Circus Contraption, a marvelous burlesque-style musical comedy circus at the very intimate setting of the CELLspace warehouse in San Francisco's Mission district. I arrived early and was able to grab a couch up front to view from (ala the Red Vic or Parkway Speakeasy movie theatres).
This year's show is "Grand American Traveling Dime Museum" which is particularly appropriate theme given the re-opening this month of the Musee Mechanique on Fisherman's Wharf. The show plays at 9pm every Friday, Saturday, and Sunday in August except for August 15th and August 29th, and is only $15!
The troupe consisted of twelve players, who performed almost two dozen acts (with an intermission in the middle) that ranged from clownwork, trapeze, ropework, tumbling, acrobatics, juggling, skits, stilts, puppets, etc., all set to music. What makes Circus Contraption truly unique is the risque nature of the acts, and the raunchy exuberance of the music numbers. With the Pickles Family Circus and Seven Fingers there is often a subtext of eroticism and sensuality, but as these are family shows these themes are not overt. Circus Contraption is quite overt and fun -- definitely rated R stuff.
I'd not put the athletic complexity of the circus acts up there with Seven Fingers or Cirque du Soleil, but that is also part of what makes them so fun. I particularly liked that most of the cast participated as musicians, clowns, and performers at different points of the show, giving a dynamism to the troupe -- you never knew who was going to do what. This also gave some authentic amateurism to the show ('amateur' meaning 'to love') that was delightful.
The musicianship of the troupe was superior (sample), and was up there with the great acts. I picked up a CD when I left and listened to it on the way home and it was a quality treat. The band is also playing on Monday's this month at "The Odeon" bar at 3223 Mission (at Valencia).
So if you are in the SF Bay Area this month, go run and get yourself a ticket. I hope to go again on August 27th.
Posted on August 7, 2004 at 02:03 PM in Recreation | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Seven Fingers of the Hand
Yesterday I watched the amazing Seven Fingers of the Hand Circus. There were parts of it that were so beautiful and meaningful that I cried.
I decided to go because 2 of the 7 members have a history with the Bay Area "Pickle's Family Circus" which was a fabulous intimate circus that disbanded about 10 years ago. I loved the Pickles Family Circus because it was "human" -- I found Cirque de Soleil to be too cold and almost unhuman. What do I mean by this? Cirque de Soleil's acts have a tendency to try to be high art -- to divorce themselves from real people and become unemotional pure images of beauty -- even the clown acts seem a bit 'alien' to me. Every act of Pickle's, in contrast, was more human, with smiles and grunts and real emotions.
My favorite Pickle's act was a pixie-sized contortionist clown climbing all over a large barrel-chested MC. He would try to push her to the floor and she would keep climbing up on him such that he never succeeds. In spite of his size (and audience expectation) the big MC would do some acrobatic things that you didn't think a big guy like that could do. This would go on for 3-4 minutes, starting with frustration of the MC and the clowning pixie, and changing to their mutual appreciation of their differences -- the athleticism and largeness of the MC, and the flexibility and smallness of the pixie.
Seven Fingers of the Hand was everything that I hoped for, and more. When we arrived, we were led down the side of the theatre and all of a sudden I noticed that it looked like we were were all being led backstage. We curve around and all of a sudden see an entrance -- maybe 5 foot tall requiring most of us to duck. We duck through and to our surprise, we are have walked through a fridgerator, and we are on the stage!
One of the 7 players welcomes us, and another offers random people a glass of tea as we walk across the stage to our seats. The stage is set like a city loft, with a tv, some couches, a bed, a bathtub and shower, a kitchen, and of course the fridgerator we entered through. On the stage, and chatting to members of the audience are the 7 cast members, all wearing comfortable looking white shorts or athletic and white t-shirts.
The audience arrives over 30 minutes and the 7 players act as if we are guests of their loft, serving some of us tea, chatting, sweeping the floor, etc.
Then as everyone is seated, a fabulous DJ (who besides being able to scratch can also sing and play various instruments) is introduced, and the show begins.
It is really difficult for me to describe the show itself -- there were over a dozen "acts" but they were all integrated together in such a way as to introduce the personalities and humanness of the players. I'll instead point you to these reviews which describe it better then I can.
However, I can talk about what moved me -- first off, there was of course the beauty and athleticism of the players. In particular, there was the double 'tissu' act, a solo by the contortionist Isabele Chasse, hanging from two red silk curtain 20 feet above the stage, while the DJ played music on the theme of temptation.
Next there was the intimacy -- the Palace of Fine Arts is not a small theatre, but it felt intimate because of the way we arrived there and the way they treated us. Entering through the refrigerator door reminded me of the way you enter a Japanese tea house -- it requires to to humble yourself and bow to enter the new space.
Finally, there was a subtle theme, not at all obvious, of the 'teamness' of the 7 players. This included playfullness, creative conflict, minor jealousy, admiration, copying -- all as if the players lived in this loft together, like a cast of Friends. We were witness this artificact of their collaboration as if we were part of the collaboration.
I'm disappointed that they are leaving the Bay Area in a few days so that I can get all my friends to go, but I hope to see them the next time they return to the Bay Area and will drag all of my friends along.
Posted on January 2, 2004 at 12:15 PM in Recreation | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Holiday Over
I had a nice relaxing five day holiday -- good to get the creative juices flowing again.
Posted on December 30, 2003 at 10:00 AM in Recreation | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
