Timeline for What is it called when experts think they only know a small part of a topic and amateurs think they know almost all of a topic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2018 at 17:30 | history | edited | Tonepoet | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
I am changing attribution styles for readability's sake.
|
| Apr 25, 2017 at 18:31 | comment | added | TylerH | @Kimball No, it addresses both; it is just more commonly used for low-skilled individuals overestimating their ability, and less commonly used for high-skilled individuals underestimating their own ability. Partly because the latter situation is usually framed differently: "I can do X simply, so surely it is simple for others and therefore we are of comparable skill". | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 11:54 | comment | added | Guy Schalnat | @laurel thanks for the original study link. That clarifies things better than the Wiki article did. | |
| Apr 22, 2017 at 1:58 | comment | added | Kimball | As I've heard it used, the Dunning-Kruger effect only addresses one half of the OP's question. | |
| Apr 21, 2017 at 22:06 | comment | added | Laurel♦ | @GuySchalnat The original article is worth a read. They make the comparison between "novices" and "experts". They joke about the possibility of their own unknown incompetencies: "Let us assure our readers that to the extent this article is imperfect, it is not a sin we have committed knowingly." It's not just people like the guy who thought lemon juice would make him invisible, ANYONE can fall victim to this effect (and without the skills, they can't see it themselves). | |
| Apr 21, 2017 at 19:41 | comment | added | JimmyJames | @GuySchalnat Maybe I'm not understanding but it seems like you are suggesting that the DK-effect only applies to a subset of the population and possibly that subset is somehow impaired. The original study was done on Cornell undergrads. I'm go out on a limb and suggest that students at an Ivy League school are not generally considered cognitively impaired by most people. In addition, the study found that this effect could be altered through teaching. | |
| Apr 21, 2017 at 19:27 | comment | added | Guy Schalnat | @JimmyJames Yes, I get all that, and agree, but my point is that, in the original effect, the people involved truly have "a metacognitive incapacity ... to recognize their ineptitude and evaluate their competence accurately". That is, their brains simply don't have the ability to accurately evaluate themselves. That's not true for the rest of us. If an amateur was shown the difference between themselves and a professional, they would have the ability to see the difference. The fact that they don't look has nothing to do with it. | |
| Apr 21, 2017 at 15:28 | comment | added | JimmyJames | @GuySchalnat It's not just that people with low-ability misjudge themselves as high-ability, it's goes the other way too. People with high-ability misjudge themselves to be low-ability and are often confused as to why others don't see how easy it is to do what they can do. Their results show that it's not that the case that people don't want to admit they have low skill. They truly believe that they are high-skilled and judge themselves to be more skilled than high-skilled people do. | |
| Apr 21, 2017 at 11:52 | comment | added | Guy Schalnat | While I'm not sure that OP's word "amateur" and the Dunning-Kruger's word "low-ability" actually refer to the same people, I admit that it is tempting to connect them. I believe there is a difference between not having the ability to recognize incompetence and just not using that ability for reasons of pride or whatever. | |
| Apr 20, 2017 at 16:47 | history | answered | Laurel♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |