BEFORE
The Dunbar number is known as a series of numbers that associate with the “groups” of people in your life. The most common number range is 150 of your “acquaintances” down to your 5 closest friends or “support system’. The “rule of 3” associates with how many people your inner group increases or decreases by as you create more relationships. Dunbar was able to discover these number rations by comparing the neuroscience of humans to other primates. The issue that arises with our social groups is the use of technology and social networking. Social media has caused the Dunbar number, rule of three, and face-to-face communication to lose relevance to our society due to the amount of possible online interaction. Konnikova writes that the less in person social and physical communication a person has, the less likely they are to have developed social skills and ability to follow the Dunbar number. As the rise of online communication and social media continues, the closeness and reality of human relationships suffers.
AFTER
Scientists closely studied the nature of relationships in primates, discovering the concepts of Dunbar’s number and the “rule of 3”. Dunbar’s number is a ratio of numbers ranging from 5-150 used to determine the closeness of a relationship. The 150 would be used to describe your acquaintances, 100 for your close friends, down to the “core 5” that consist of family and closest friends. The term “rule of 3” states that your “circles” will increase and decrease by 3 as you grow. Humans, much like primates, gravitate to creating these large groups in order to survive and live. Dunbar’s research suggests that traditional societies consisted of about 148.4 people in order to hunt and gather. The “number of 150” can be demonstrated through corporation size, armies, and communities.
REVISIONS
In this paragraph, I had added a lot of fluff that did not fit what the question was specifically asking. I took away the end of the paragraph that stated more of the “problem” being discussed in the article than the prompt. This did not add to my response but create unnecessary information at the end. Instead, I tried to include more specifics that related to Dunbar’s number and the rule of 3. I added examples used in the articles to back up what my own definitions were. Another thing I tried to add to my writing was making it more concise. I tend to add extra wording to my writing that isn’t needed. Taking out buffers of wording and unrelated sentences made my paragraph shorter. Looking at my rewritten paragraph, I can see that it answers only what the question is asking and uses more specific wording to get my points across.
