I’m thinking that Dunbar’s study of the “dynamics of human social networks, and the roles played by trust, obligation and frequency of interaction in maintaining relationships” may be usefully applied to online networks / relationships.

Wonder if we could get 100 to 150 of the PR bloggers to participate? Worth exploring. I’m going to explore the available survey instruments / research and see what might be done.

I keep going back to Robin Dunbar who examined the relationships between cortical size and primary community (close friends) size and came up with a human primary social group size of about 150. Depending on whose work you look at the number is in the range 135 – 200.
This means there is little opportunity for social media to engage more than a few among the primary social group and so the opportunity to have really powerful influence is quite muted.

But Stephen Quarts and Terry Sejnowski argue that humans are biologically primes to acquire behaviours through cultural learning.

Somewhere in the middle is something that helps us understand this and while the richness of the media (blogs, wiki’s podcasts etc) is limited compared to ‘human interface’, I suspect that multiple channels are important to add depth (….was mentioned in a couple of blogs, has loads of Google Juice, is references by a friend – so must be good).

This might then give us some foundadtion…

But, as you say, a lot of it is guess work

We’ve been involved in the experiment here for two years, or so. Eyes open, all the while, the reminder that social media is new and (as of yet) unpredictable has remained front and center.

There is risk involved in embracing social media, but all (business and other) decisions involve risk. Sometimes you need to join the experiment with open eyes and no illusions.

Ted

As you are aware, I am not a big fan. But this is good stuff. I look forward to more like it.

Kind regards,

- Amanda Chapel

I guess both have their place. I just don’t do the other well. Even when justified, I don’t sleep well after doing it that way.

And, I am not so much aiming it totally at Steve Rubel. I appreciate that he does point out all sorts of new ideas, tools and tactics through his amazing link blogging. But, the traditional media sources seem to view him as ‘the’ leading thought provider. I just don’t see that.

More important is how he (and others) promise the Chalice and give us a Dixie Cup. I know of many great thinkers out in this social media blogging community. I doubt any of the legitimate thought leaders would seriously describe themselves as an expert.

It is a thought I’ve had for a long time and have posted about it several times. Truth be told, I only comment about Steve’s posts when they are so filled with self-contradictions. The example here is a non-social media delivery format with a message that dialogue is everything. That, I believe, is worth pointing out.