Your first time here? Welcome, I'm glad you've dropped in.... David Soul (aka Bricoleur)

marchers“Those thinking that online social networking is a substitute for face-to-face interactions might want to think again.  Recent research in psychology suggests there are some benefits to real-life socializing that the Internet just can’t provide; researchers at Stanford University have published a report in Psychological Science called “Synchrony and Cooperation” that indicates engaging in synchronous activities (e.g., marching, singing, dancing) strengthens social attachments and enables cooperation”

via Asynchrony in social networking could spell trouble | Technimentis.

Related posts on Bricoleur Systems -auto generated:

  1. An Active Networking Approach to Event Notification Authors: Michael Avery, Bob Kummerfeld. School of Information Technologies. The University of Sydney, Sydney Australia.  Abstract:“One of the challenges in developing...
  2. Kyle Lacy, Social Media – Indianapolis Image by DBarefoot via Flickr I found this fascinating quote today: 20 Reasons Why You Cannot Ignore Social Media November...
  3. Physics in Trouble: Why the Public Should Care American theoretical physicist Lee Smolin, author of “The Trouble with Physics,” states that physics has lost its way amid failed...
  4. Autopoietic Theory and Social Systems: Theory and Practice Dr. Whitaker's ACM siggroup pages on 'Self-organization' (which is a popular theme in current studies of human social activity, enterprises,...
  5. Breadcrumbs for 2006-07-02 7 Easy Steps to a Pimped Out Money Making WordPress Blog (tags: blogs wordpress) 27 Of The Most Useful Firefox...

Tags: science, thinking

This entry was posted on Sunday, December 21st, 2008 at 2:42 am and is filed under Odds & Sods. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed at this time.

  • December 21, 2008 at 5:44 pm michael silverton
    I like this because it's more evidence of the Beginning of the End for this meatspace bias. Piles of reverse-chronological-navel-gazing data that seek to "prove" the superiority of the historical status quo. The impetus is understandable -- millions of years of evolution that depended upon body contact -- but substrate independence represents an evolutionary step function. Do not confuse my comments as uncritical dismissal; however, do look to 2009 for more such studies that doth protest too much. Ready or not, our biological bodies are no longer the limiting evolutionary factor.

Add a comment on FriendFeed