I admit to being somewhat confused by your post, in part because of its awkward formatting but also because of some points expressed. I've re-formatted you post below to make for easier reading. I'd also like to make the following points:
(1) As one of the persons who stated that "six degrees" was not original with Milgram, I am glad to see that you agree with the point though you seem to do so in a roundabout way and I don't understand when you say "set the record straight". Straight with respect to what? Given that this comment immediately follows the "six degrees" issue, it would seem that this is what you're referring to but you confirm the point. Hence, part of my confusion. (2) Regarding Frigyes Karinthy, it is his *short story* not essay entitled "Chains" (though I concede that the difference in titles could be a translation problem) which is associated with the "six degree" issue. Barnes & Noble sells "A Journey Round My Skull", the translation of his book that contains the story. See: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/A-Journey-Round-My-Skull/Frigyes-Karinthy/e/9781590172582 or http://tinyurl.com/6xff9d (3) Although Milgram used the terms "Small World Method" or "Small World Problem" they are not really original with him as he makes clear in the first sentence of the Korte & Milgram (1970): |The _small world_ [italics in original], a phrase long current in our |language, but first employed in the social sciences by Kochen and |Pool (1958), refers to the fact that individuals are linked through |bonds of kinship and acquintance into complex communication |networks. (p101) It is true that Milgram developed *a* method for experimentally testing whether one could map or estimate the path/links between two separated individuals but it is neither the only method or even the best method (given the low number of completions that Milgram obtained). (4) It is important to keep in mind that research rarely occurs in a vacuum and one thing that we should teach our students is that one should examine the reference list of an article in order to determine the breadth of scholarship and to locate critical work. Unfortunately, I cannot locate my photocopy of Milgram's Psychology Today article but if memory serves, there were no references in the article. Examination of the Korte & Milgram (1970) article in JPSP shows only four references: one for the unpublished manuscript by Pool & Kochen and three with Milgram as co-author. The Travers & Milgram (1969) Sociometry article contains more references and provides a better introducation to the background of the small world problem but this is a sociological journal would not have been readily available to psychologists at the time unless they were interested in the issue of social networks, which had been studied empirically (e.g., Rapoport & Horvath 1961) and theoretically/mathematically (e.g., Gurevitch 1961) before Milgram came to the issue. I raise these points because they begin to approximae the context in which Milgram conducted his research. If one is willing to accept a less rigorous source, the Wikipedia entry provides some interesting information but it is unclear whether it has been verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_degrees_of_separation |The "small world" experiments | |Michael Gurevich [NOTE: Dissertation Abstracts has his name |as Gurevitch] conducted seminal work in his empirical study of |the structure of social networks in his 1961 Massachusetts Institute |of Technology PhD dissertation under Ithiel de Sola Pool. [4] |Mathematician Manfred Kochen, an Austrian who had been involved |in Statist urban design, extrapolated these empirical results in a |mathematical manuscript, Contacts and Influences,[5] concluding |that in a U.S.-sized population without social structure, "it is practically |certain that any two individuals can contact one another by means |of at least two intermediaries. In a [socially] structured population it is |less likely but still seems probable. And perhaps for the whole world's |population, probably only one more bridging individual should be |needed." They subsequently constructed Monte Carlo simulations |based on Gurevich's data, which recognized that both weak and |strong acquaintance links are needed to model social structure. The |simulations, running on the primitive computers of 1973, were limited, |but still were able to predict that a more realistic three degrees of |separation existed across the U.S. population, a value that foreshadowed |the findings of Stanley Milgram. | |American psychologist Stanley Milgram continued Gurevich's experiments |in acquaintanceship networks at Harvard University in Cambridge, U.S. |Kochen and de Sola Pool's manuscript, Contacts and Influences, [6] |was conceived while both were working at the University of Paris in |the early 1950s, during a time when Milgram visited and collaborated |in their research. Their unpublished manuscript circulated among |academics for over 20 years before publication in 1978. It formally |articulated the mechanics of social networks, and explored the mathematical |consequences of these (including the degree of connectedness). The |manuscript left many significant questions about networks unresolved, |and one of these was the number of degrees of separation in actual |social networks. Milgram took up the challenge on his return from Paris, |leading to the experiments reported in The Small World Problem [7] |in popular science journal Psychology Today, with a more rigorous |version of the paper appearing in Sociometry two years later. [8] |The Psychology Today article generated enormous publicity for the |experiments, which are well known today, long after much of the |formative work has been forgotten. | |Milgram's article made famous [9] his 1967 set of experiments to |investigate de Sola Pool and Kochen's "small world problem." |Mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot, born in Lithuania, and having |traveled extensively in Eastern Europe, was aware of the Statist |rules of thumb, and was also a colleague of de Sola Pool, Kochen |and Milgram at the University of Paris during the early 1950s (Kochen |brought Mandelbrot to work at the Institute for Advanced Study |and later IBM in the U.S.). This circle of researchers was fascinated |by the interconnectedness and "social capital" of human networks. |Milgram's study results showed that people in the United States seemed |to be connected by approximately three friendship links, on average, |without speculating on global linkages; he never actually used the term |"Six Degrees of Separation." Since the Psychology Today article gave |the experiments wide publicity, Milgram, Kochen, and Karinthy all |had been incorrectly attributed as the origin of the notion of Six Degrees; |the most likely populizer of the term "Six Degrees of Separation" would |be John Guare, who attributed the value 'six' to Marconi. Again, one should probably verify the accuracy of the above statements before relying too heavily on them. (5) There is the larger issue of the significance and meaning of Milgram's "Small World" research. Although the "Six Degrees" concept has become part of popular culture, this is probably more similar to "People Only Use 10% of their Brains" than an empirical relationship like the law of effect. To better appreciate this point, it might be useful to read Judith Kleinfeld's "Could it be a big world after all? The 'Six Degree of Seperation' Myth" which was published in "Society" but is available on the web at: http://www.uaf.edu/northern/big_world.html Dr. Blass is familiar with this article and perhaps he could comment on it. -Mike Palij New York University [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:59:12 -0700, Dr. Thomas Blass wrote: >A couple of people on this list have stated that that the "six degrees" >idea did not originate with Milgram. > >Let me add my two-cents' worth to try to set the record straight.. >First , some clarification about terminology.Milgram never used the >phrase "six degrees of separation" > >The source of that phrase was the title of a play and then a movie >by John Guare, which was clearly based on Milgram's idea.Milgram >always referred to the phenomenon as "the small world problem" or >"the small world method", the idea that large social networks could >be traversed by a surprisingly short chain of acquaintances. > >A Hungarian writer, Frigyes Karinthy , in an essay titled "Chain-link", >published in the 1920s, did suggest that any strangers could be linked >by a 5-person chain. Karinthy's essay was brought to light by computer >scientist Albert-Laszlo Barabasi, himself a Hungarian, in his book "Linked". > >However , Milgram was not influenced by Karinthy, and it is highly >unlikely that he even knew about Karinthy.In fact , although Karithy's >statement was prescient and insightful, I am not aware of any empirical >work that was rooted in his statement.. > >In his first publication on the phenomenon "The small world problem" >which was published in Psychology Today in 1967, Milgram clearly >identifies the source for his work. Ithiel de Sola Pool , a political scientist >at MIT and Manfred Kochen , a mathematician at IBM had developed >a mathematical model of the small world idea. > >Milgram had heard about it ,and --always the empiricist-- , decided to >test it in the real world , using the "small world method" which he invented >and whose results he first presented in the Psychology Today article.. > >A few years later he published two scientific reports on the small world >problem, the first in the journal "Sociometry " , in 1969, co-authored with >Jeffrey Travers and another article in JPSP in 1970 with Charles Korte . >both Travers and Korte were Milgram's students when he was at Harvard. > >It might seem odd that Milgram would first publish the results of a scientific >study in Psychology Today, a magazine , and then only later in journals.The >reason was a combination of helpfulness and self-interest. Psychology Today >was just being launched (Milgram's article appears in the first issue) and the >editors asked him for a contribution to lend some prestige to their new >endeavor.At the same time ,it was advantageous for Milgram to get his >findings out to the public quickly without the long publications lags typical >of journals. >Best, >Tom Blass >Professor of Psychology >UMBC Baltimore, MD >www.stanleymilgram.com --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
