Healthy Social Connections Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections Model of Social SPECIAL SITUATION RESOURCE REUIREMENTS Connection Situations where specic connections are useful

Our social connections have the power to positively our health and wellbeing. They can CONNECTION POSITIVE TYPES NEATIVE OUTPUTS foster community development Emotional and provide resilience during Resources I get attachment I give HUMANS from my connections times of crisis. Social connection I to my connections I can be typically understood as INPUTS ANIMALS SOCIAL CONNECTION CIRCLES OUTPUTS face-to-face contact through IVE INNER ET Time I give NON-HUMANS CIRCLE I get friends, , neighbours, and to my connections from my connections can also take shape through OTHERS SOCIAL personal emotional attachments ALLIES maintained via phone or online. TRIE Connections can be with carers VILLAE or service providers, pets, modern technologies like robots and metaphysical entities SPACES FOR CONNECTION like a god or understandings Specic spaces can be designed to activate connections of country. EVALUATION Check the balance, so that input given equals outputs received from connections. Are the outputs positive?

INPUTS CONNECTION TYPES SOCIAL CONNECTION CIRCLES Each person has their Human connections stock of emotional can give more resources We know from Robin attachment and time and feelings compared Dunbar’s work on the to give to build and to connections social brain hypothesis maintain their social with animals and that human connections connections. Inner layers non-humans (artificial form layers, which we call of social connections intelligence) or others circles, involving those need more emotional (metaphysical entities with intense emotional attachment and time such as God or country). attachment and high to maintain them. Some connections bring time (in inner layers) to In research studies, extra resources useful less attachment and frequency of contact in special situations. time in outer layers. is used as a proxy Location of these Layers typically form a measure for emotional connection types within 5:15:50:150 numbers attachment. the layers, predicts model, from intimate how much emotional inner layers (your ‘Inner attachment and time Circle’) to infrequent they get. personal connections (your ‘Village’).

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections SPECIAL SITUATION RESOURCE REUIREMENTS Situations where specic connections are useful

CONNECTION POSITIVE TYPES NEATIVE OUTPUTS

Emotional Resources I get attachment I give HUMANS from my connections I to my connections I INPUTS ANIMALS SOCIAL CONNECTION CIRCLES OUTPUTS IVE INNER ET Time I give NON-HUMANS CIRCLE Feelings I get to my connections from my connections

OTHERS SOCIAL ALLIES

TRIE

VILLAE

SPACES FOR CONNECTION Specic spaces can be designed to activate connections

EVALUATION Check the balance, so that input given equals outputs received from connections. Are the outputs positive?

OUTPUTS SPECIAL SITUATIONS SPACES FOR EVALUATION CONNECTION Evidence shows a There are special There are key things to consistent set of feelings situations where social Evidence shows there bear in mind that help that people emote, connections are required are a number of spaces in understanding how realised through/from to ‘step-up’. It’s good to set up in/by society to interact optimally their social connections be prepared for these with explicit or implicit with the concept of and a set of resources eg neighbours are goals to connect people. social connections; eg they get from others, useful in emergencies; These are useful places people should check through their social connections to other to make connections, they are getting the connections. networks are useful eg volunteering, output resources and for learning or finding events, community feelings from their new jobs. gardens – may activate connections – most of connections, build the time, they shouldn’t communication and be giving more than they literacy including are getting back; it might digital literacy. be more or less easy to build and maintain social connections depending on personal circumstances.

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections 1. Inputs and connection types

Emotional attachment I give HUMANS I to my connections IVE INPUTS ANIMALS Time I give NON-HUMANS to my connections

OTHERS

Emotional attachment can be the However, we may also make Our inputs are the personal intensity or how emotionally connections with non-human entities investments we make close we feel to our connections. Time which may also provide us with a range is the frequency of contact we spend (though more limited) of resources and in our connections, on our connections. Because time is feelings. These include animals like our and a person has their finite, the amount of time we allocate pets who serve as loyal companions to maintaining a connection is a good (Amiot & Bastian, 2015), human stock of emotional indicator of our bonds and a good replacements like robots or home proxy to measure closeness (Dunbar virtual assistants (Epley et al, 2008), attachment and time et al., 2015). The connections that we and even metaphysical connections, as inputs to invest. hold closest to us usually take more these could be religious as with a god, time and emotional attachment to or even through connections to country maintain. (Green & Elliott, 2010; Lim & Putnam, 2010). The types of connections that we make most prominently are with humans who provide us with the most resources and feelings that we require. These include family, who may need less time to maintain the connection due to kinship bonds; friends who may need a range of inputs of time and emotional attachment depending on type of resources and feelings we want from them; neighbours, work colleagues, acquaintances, service providers and online friends. These are all connections we can invest different levels of time or emotional attachment in, and who may provide, in return, different levels of resources, support, information and feelings.

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections 2. Social connection circles

SOCIAL CONNECTION CIRCLES INNER CIRCLE SOCIAL ALLIES

TRIE

VILLAE

We know from anthropologist Robin Our intimate inner layers or circles, There is consistent Dunbar and colleagues’ work (Dunbar, inner circle and social allies, are our evidence that human 1993; Dunbar & Spoors, 1995; Hill primary network and these connections & Dunbar, 1995; Dunbar, 1998; play a central role in informing and social connections are MacCarron et al., 2016) on the social moderating our interactions with the structured into layers, brain hypothesis that the connections wider community and they are those we form are structured in layers that from whom we are most likely to seek or in circles as is reflect the allocation of our personal advice, receive emotional comfort from, resources of emotional attachment and and who we turn to in times of severe reflected in everyday time. Based on neuroimaging studies, be it financial or emotional. We speech. For example, Dunbar and colleagues found that there are most likely to commit most of our is a limit to the number of connections time to these and they would receive we speak of our ‘inner the brain can manage at one time, and much of our emotional attachment. this capacity is layered depending The outer layers or circles, the tribe circle’ of friends. on the intimacy of the connections. and village are our secondary group Layers typically form a 5:15:50:150 of connections that may be less numbers model, intimate inner layers personal, or those that we spend less take up more time and/or emotional time with. They can include family we attachment (your ‘Inner Circle’) through don’t see that often, friends we see to infrequent personal connections, socially, or from hobby, recreational or where you have less attachment or religious groups, work colleagues, or commit less time (your ‘Village’). This acquaintances that we have things in pattern of layering has been found common with. in studies of traditional groups like medieval villages, hunting tribes and Relationships in all circles can change army units, and also modern groups over time, and the circles only represent like social media networks such as the amount and ‘strength’ of social Facebook and Twitter, online computer connections at a given time. Strengths gaming and in mobile phone records. of relationships change quicker in the outer rather than inner circles and can be leveraged depending on the different resources that we need, and they provide at specific times.

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections 3. Outputs

Resources I get from my connections I OUTPUTS ET Feelings I get from my connections

Humans have the highest potential flood. Other connections can bring extra Evidence shows that to provide these, but their different resources useful in special situations different types of attributes can help you attend to for example connections with people a range of your needs that require who work in different industry sectors, social connections different levels of your time and have different knowledge and access are associated with attachment (Granovetter, 1973; to different networks can be useful for Roberts & Dunbar, 2011) Thoits, 2011). gaining new jobs and information. While different outputs, For example, you may have strong connections with people in positions attachments to family though you may of power, status or specific technical which are the levels of not need as much time to maintain expertise can be useful in situations feelings and resources these because of your kinship bonds where community activation or protest (Roberts & Dunbar, 2011). Friends also are needed; and connections to that we get back from have different attributes, there are individuals in your local community and those that provide high levels of support community services may provide you our connections. that you may place more time into with greater resilience in times of crises maintaining, and those that you may or emergency. socialise with but are not emotionally Connections to non-humans can also attached to. These people may provide provide you with a range of resources you with other resources such as fun, and feelings. Animals with their loyalty entertainment or information. You can can provide comfort, companionship have a strong emotional attachment to and (Amiot and Bastian, 2015). online friends, particularly those you Robots are beginning to be used to also know face-to-face. Online friends provide companionship and assistance can require less time to maintain. and metaphysical connections They may provide you with emotional can provide a sense of identity and support (Dunbar et al., 2015), but will comfort (Green & Elliott, 2010; Lim & be less likely to provide practical help. Putnam, 2010). Neighbours could be friends or just acquaintances but could be useful due to their proximity to provide you practical support like watering your plants when you’re away or for help in dealing with local crises like bushfire or

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections Conclusion

The Social Connection model reflects key aspects of social connection that have been raised by a diverse body of research and acknowledges the changing nature of contemporary social life. It is the result of work completed by the Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute and the Australian Red Cross as part of the Healthy Social Connection Project. We anticipate that the model can be used to support practice to understand the changing face of contemporary social connection, and to tackle social and in a strength-based way.

REFERENCES Amiot, C. E. & Bastian, B. 2015. Toward a Epley, N., Scott, A., Adam, W. & John, T. C. 2008. Lim, C. and Putnam, R.D., 2010. Religion, social psychology of human–animal relations. Creating Social Connection Through Inferential networks, and life satisfaction. American Psychological Bulletin, 141, 6. Reproduction: Loneliness and Perceived sociological review, 75(6), pp.914–933. Dunbar R (1993) Coevolution of neocortical Agency in Gadgets, Gods, and Greyhounds. MacCarron P, Kaski K, Dunbar R (2016) Calling size, group size and language in humans. Psychological Science, 19, 114–120. Dunbar’s numbers. Social Networks, 47, Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 16, 681–735. Granovetter MS (1973) The strength of weak 151–155. Dunbar R (1998) The Social brain hypothesis. ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, Roberts S & Dunbar R (2011) The costs of Evolutionary Anthropology 6(5) 178–190. 1360–80. family and friends: an 18 month longitudinal Dunbar R, Spoors M (1995) Social networks, Green, M. & Elliott, M. 2010. Religion, health, study of relationship maintenance and decay. support cliques and kinship. Human Nature, and psychological well-being. Journal of religion Evolutionary Human Behaviour, 32, 186–197. 6(3), 273–90. and health, 49, 149–163. Thoits PA (2011) Mechanisms linking social Dunbar R, Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A Hill RA & Dunbar R. (1995) Social network size in ties and support to physical and mental health. (2015) The structure of online social networks humans. Human Nature, 14(1), 53–72. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), mirrors those in the offline world. Social 145–161. Networks, 43, 39–47.

Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Professor Jane Farmer, Director +61 (03) 9214 8180 [email protected] John Street, Hawthorn Victoria 3122 Australia The Australian Red Cross Ebony Gaylor Community Mobilisation Australian Red Cross [email protected]

This report is released subject to a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND license (License). This means, in summary, that you may reproduce, transmit and distribute the text, provided that you do not do so for commercial purposes, and provided that you attribute the text as extracted from Healthy Social Connections, Swinburne Social Innovation Institute, Melbourne, 2018. You must not alter, transform or build upon the text in this publication. Your rights under the License are in addition to any fair dealing rights which you have under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). For further terms of the License, please see http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ © Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute, September 2018 Swinburne Social Innovation Research Institute Healthy Social Connections