scholarly journals Social complexity as a proximate and ultimate factor in communicative complexity

2012 ◽  
Vol 367 (1597) ◽  
pp. 1785-1801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd M. Freeberg ◽  
Robin I. M. Dunbar ◽  
Terry J. Ord
Keyword(s):  
Social Complexity ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Causal Factor ◽  
Human Language ◽  
The Social ◽  
Alternative Hypotheses ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Complexity Hypothesis ◽  
Complex Social Systems ◽  
Over Time

The ‘social complexity hypothesis’ for communication posits that groups with complex social systems require more complex communicative systems to regulate interactions and relations among group members. Complex social systems, compared with simple social systems, are those in which individuals frequently interact in many different contexts with many different individuals, and often repeatedly interact with many of the same individuals in networks over time. Complex communicative systems, compared with simple communicative systems, are those that contain a large number of structurally and functionally distinct elements or possess a high amount of bits of information. Here, we describe some of the historical arguments that led to the social complexity hypothesis, and review evidence in support of the hypothesis. We discuss social complexity as a driver of communication and possible causal factor in human language origins. Finally, we discuss some of the key current limitations to the social complexity hypothesis—the lack of tests against alternative hypotheses for communicative complexity and evidence corroborating the hypothesis from modalities other than the vocal signalling channel.

New research frameworks in the study of chimpanzee and gorilla sociality and communication

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam G. B. Roberts ◽  
Anna Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Social Evolution ◽  
Social Complexity ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
The Social ◽  
Human Social Evolution ◽  
Research Frameworks ◽  
New Research ◽  
Large Groups

Group size in primates is strongly correlated with brain size, but exactly what makes larger groups more ‘socially complex’ than smaller groups is still poorly understood. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) are among our closest living relatives and are excellent model species to investigate patterns of sociality and social complexity in primates, and to inform models of human social evolution. The aim of this paper is to propose new research frameworks, particularly the use of social network analysis, to examine how social structure differs in small, medium and large groups of chimpanzees and gorillas, to explore what makes larger groups more socially complex than smaller groups. Given a fission-fusion system is likely to have characterised hominins, a comparison of the social complexity involved in fission-fusion and more stable social systems is likely to provide important new insights into human social evolution

Social Networks and Social Complexity in Female-bonded Primates

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Lehmann ◽  
Katherine Andrews ◽  
Robin Dunbar
Keyword(s):  
Social Network ◽  
Social Relationships ◽  
Social Complexity ◽  
Social Bonds ◽  
Primate Brain ◽  
The Social ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Primate Group ◽  
Network Metrics ◽  
The Relationship

Most primates are intensely social and spend a large amount of time servicing social relationships. The social brain hypothesis suggests that the evolution of the primate brain has been driven by the necessity of dealing with increased social complexity. This chapter uses social network analysis to analyse the relationship between primate group size, neocortex ratio and several social network metrics. Findings suggest that social complexity may derive from managing indirect social relationships, i.e. relationships in which a female is not directly involved, which may pose high cognitive demands on primates. The discussion notes that a large neocortex allows individuals to form intense social bonds with some group members while at the same time enabling them to manage and monitor less intense indirect relationships without frequent direct involvement with each individual of the social group.

Introduction

2010 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela T. Ragusa
Keyword(s):  
Social Order ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Ways Of Knowing ◽  
Change Over Time ◽  
Sandra Harding ◽  
The Social ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Over Time

Epistemology is the concept used to describe ways of knowing. In other words, how you know what you know. Sociologists have been interested in how knowledge is produced since the discipline was founded in the 19th Century. How we come to know our world and make sense of it are influenced by social institutions, individual attitudes and behaviors, and our demographic position within the social order. The social order is an historical product which continues to change over time. To facilitate our learning from our socio-historical experiences, sociologists frequently turn to ideas expressed by social theorists. Social theory, whether classical or contemporary, may thus be employed to help us make sense of changes in our social and material world. Although technology is arguably as ancient as our first ancestors, as the chapters in this book reveal, the characteristics of and communications within our postindustrial society vary greatly from those which occurred in the age of modernity. This introductory chapter identifies a few well-known social theorists who have historically attempted to explain how and why social systems, at macro and micro levels, change over time. Next, it contextualizes communication as a cultural product, arguing the best way to examine the topic is from multiple, local perspectives. In the feminist tradition of postmodernist Sandra Harding, it implores us to consider the premise and source of the knowledge sources we use and espouse while communicating and interacting in specific ways and environments. Finally, grounded in the systemic backdrop of social inequality, this chapter encourages readers to begin the task of critical thinking and reflecting about how each of us, as individuals and members of local communities, nations and the world, assuage or reproduces the structurally-derived inequalities which the globalization of communication and technical systems and interacting in a global environment manifests.

scholarly journals Comparing measures of social complexity: larger mountain gorilla groups do not have a greater diversity of relationships

2020 ◽  
Vol 287 (1931) ◽  
pp. 20201026
Author(s):  
Robin E. Morrison ◽  
Winnie Eckardt ◽  
Tara S. Stoinski ◽  
Lauren J. N. Brent
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Social Complexity ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Mountain Gorilla ◽  
Fine Scale ◽  
Unit Size ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Social Unit ◽  
The Social

Social complexity reflects the intricate patterns of social interactions in societies. Understanding social complexity is fundamental for studying the evolution of diverse social systems and the cognitive innovations used to cope with the demands of social life. Social complexity has been predominantly quantified by social unit size, but newer measures of social complexity reflect the diversity of relationships. However, the association between these two sets of measures remains unclear. We used 12 years of data on 13 gorilla groups to investigate how measures of social complexity relate to each other. We found that group size was a poor proxy for relationship diversity and that the social complexity individuals experienced within the same group varied greatly. Our findings demonstrate two fundamental takeaways: first, that the number of relationships and the diversity of those relationships represent separate components of social complexity, both of which should be accounted for; and second, that social complexity measured at the group level may not represent the social complexity experienced by individuals in those groups. These findings suggest that comprehensive studies of social complexity, particularly those relating to the social demands faced by individuals, may require fine-scale social data to allow accurate comparisons across populations and species.

scholarly journals From “absolute” time to “acquiring control over time”: theoretical aspects of social time in publications of the 1920s – 1930s

2021 ◽  
pp. 24-36
Author(s):  
Viktor Andreevich Artemov ◽  
Olga Viktorovna Novokhatskaya
Keyword(s):  
Social Practice ◽  
Institutional Environment ◽  
Time Budget ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Transformation Process ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Biological Time ◽  
Social Time ◽  
The Social ◽  
Over Time

This article examines the publications of the Russian scholars on sociological aspects of social time, which are poorly studied in the Russian and foreign literature. The author believes that they are the pioneers in the field of the sociology of time. Analysis is conducted in such concepts as past, present, and future time; their content and correlation; time as the transformation process; use of time and control over time»; time of an individual and time of the social system; biological time as a step towards social time. The beginning of the XX century indicated the organic correlation of the development of natural science and general science and social practice, activity. Most vividly such correlation manifested in the area of the perception of time, relation the time of publications presented in the article, which are ideologically connected with the social practice of the studies on time, and the origins of the theory of social time.  It is noted that the first sociological study on the budgets of time was conducted in Petrograd in the 1821 – 1922 by P. Sorokin. The authors tried to remain within the field of sociology, understanding sociology as a science about functionality and transformation of social systems, presented by the “submerged” into cultural-institutional environment subsystems of the subjects, their activity and relationships. The article focuses attention on the statements of scholars, which had conceptual significance for the science, as well as for solution of the real time-budget problems.

Narcissistic group dynamics in multiparty systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (7/8) ◽  
pp. 310-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Schruijer
Keyword(s):  
Group Dynamics ◽  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Interorganizational Relationships ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Social Psychological ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Social ◽  
Multiparty Systems ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Cross Fertilization

Purpose – This paper aims to introduce and illustrate the notion of narcissistic group dynamics. It is claimed that narcissism does not simply reside within individuals but can be characteristic of groups and social systems. In this case, the focus is on narcissistic dynamics in multiparty systems. Design/methodology/approach – Social psychological understandings of group narcissism are complemented with notions from psychoanalysis. A systems-psychodynamic perspective, informed by psychoanalysis and systems theory, is adopted. Findings – Narcissistic group dynamics in a multiparty context are illustrated by observations from a two-day simulation of interorganizational relationships that is called “The Yacht Club” (Vansina et al., 1998). Originality/value – In the social psychological literature, narcissism thus far has been largely understood as the prevalence of feelings of ingroup superiority vis-à-vis a particular outgroup. Sometimes the term narcissism is explicitly used, in other cases not, for example in social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979), a theory that is built on group members’ need to regulate self-esteem. Psychoanalysts adopt an individualistic perspective while aiming to understand the underlying dynamics resulting in narcissism. A cross-fertilization of social psychological and psychoanalytic perspectives results in deindividualizing and depathologizing narcissism and a deeper understanding of the dynamics of (inter)group narcissism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document