126 John B. Calhoun 



follow the prior assumption that each species has an optimum intensity of 

 interaction, then each increase in n will have an analogous effect to in- 

 creasing group size. In other words, increasing n above 1.0 will increase 

 dd and df. When we are concerned with the effects of changes in m but as- 

 sume a remains static at the value appropriate to m = 1-0, then a must be 

 calculated from Eci. (60) with /x' = 1-0 and faa calculated with this a by 

 using Eq. (52) above and some value of n different from (Xb = 1.0. 



For example, consider Nb = 12. Then ab = 0.091, and db = 0.25 (see 

 Table XI). If A'' doubles and /x remains 1.0, d„ becomes 0.219, but if A^ 

 remains constant at Nb but m doubles to 2.0, 6 becomes 0.195. Thus, a 

 comparable increase in ^ produces a greater deficit in satiation, 6^, from 

 social interaction, than does a double of A^. 



Thus, saltatorial evolution of A^^^^^ to A^^"^ may be necessitated either 

 by an increase in A^ or an increase in m- The rate of change in N and ijl 

 may well offset the tolerance limit of da or 6/ and thus affect the magnitude 

 of the shift from A''^^^ to N^^^K dv essentially measures the rate of com- 

 munication and A the space within which this communication takes place. 

 Thus, n will increase if A remains constant and dv increases, or if dv re- 

 mains constant and A decreases. If both the rate, that is means, of com- 

 munication increases and the distance over which communication must 

 take place decreases, m will increase very rapidly. Detailed consideration of 

 communication is given in the following section. 



4. The m Communication Function 



We have already seen that n = (dv/A), as defined by the previous 

 Eqs. (35) and (80), is a communication-enhancing or contact-producing 

 factor. (See prior discussion under Terms and Equations, Section XIII, 

 A, 1.) Other than for pointing out in the latter part of Section XIII, B, 3 

 that altering /x has much the same consequences as altering N, we have 

 been content to consider consequences of variability in other functions 

 when IX remains constant at that value /X6 = 1.0 appropriate to A^6. 



I was led to examine the question of the consequences of varying /x 

 as a result of the observation by Birdsell and by Zimmerman and Cervantes, 

 cited in Section XII, E. They observed that where a conflict of values 

 arises in a group there results a reduction in group size. Here, we are con- 

 cerned with the special case where attitudes or values comprise a major 

 aspect of the target diameter d. Each member of the group holds some n 

 number of values by which others recognize it as an appropriate object 

 for interacting. When some particular ^-aIue is shared by all members, it 

 may be said to possess a unitary value in contributing to target diameter. 

 In other words, under this circumstance all individuals possess the same 



