As I say, "Citations of Dunning-Kruger are usually examples of it."
funny recursion (if intended)
The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
11–20 of 75 posts
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#12Personally speaking, it just struck me as odd that - outside of some rare exceptions - that someone could be so dumb that he'd actually be ignorant of his ineptitude. This is different than misrepresenting your ability. Lots of people do that for lots of reasons, but for someone to be so sheerly ignorant as is often given in the case examples struck me as someone who will sooner rather than later learn painful lesson…
The people I know who fall into this category construct an elaborate world view where they are the constant victim of all the idiots and jerks of the world. Everything that goes wrong is someone else’s fault, not their own ignorance and bad choices.
So half of reddit?
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#13I can't go a week without seeing people mention Dunning-Kruger on Reddit. It's become such a pop-cultural zeitgeist term that it's lost any ties to the original study. It's frequently abused as a derogatory adjective to describe people while claiming the superior argument, often without providing evidence. I don't know what to do about it, but its use by lay people bothers me. It's ironically Dunning-Kruger.
This is a popular opinion on HN, but I'll state again that reddit is basically unusable. I still check a few subreddits using old.reddit.com but the mobile app they constantly shove down your throat is bloated trash and the redesign is garbage. It's inevitable that something better comes along.
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#14Does this article actually contains explanation of what was wrong with the original study?
Maybe I don't know how to read with understanding, but to me this article makes only two points:
1. The effect was about all people, not just dumb people.
2. The same graph can be obtained "by random".
Point 1. makes sense, but 2. is left unexplained. There is a lot of words, but no content. Almost as if GPT-3 was writing it :) .
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#15The supposed smoking gun in the article is that if we plot random values for perceived and actual ability we get a chart that looks a lot like the chart in the original study.
I don't see how you make the leap from there to saying that the Dunning-Kruger effect is probably not real. The headline is totally overblown if you ask me.
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#16> The darling of those who wish to explain why incompetent people don’t know they’re unskilled, the Dunning-Kruger effect may actually just be a data artefact.
This doesn't strike me as true. Or rather, I don't think that it's a significant observation that some people may want to try to explain why some people are incompetent. In my experience, people don't try to "explain" incompetence in general. They will rather talk about specifics - e.g. "Some people believe this because of the misconception that X implies Y". Even if their own rationale is incorrect.
This is very different to saying that "They are stupid because they don't know that they are stupid".
Yeah it may come up as a flippant comment about an individual (or "fringe" group like the Flat Earth Society) in casual conversation, but when I consider how much I've read about and discussed the DK effect, I can't say that the implications as stated in that the quoted piece actually has a significant basis in reality. In other words, DK may be the "darling" of said group, but the self-same group is not very significant in any way in my experience.
YMMV.
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#17Personally speaking, it just struck me as odd that - outside of some rare exceptions - that someone could be so dumb that he'd actually be ignorant of his ineptitude. This is different than misrepresenting your ability. Lots of people do that for lots of reasons, but for someone to be so sheerly ignorant as is often given in the case examples struck me as someone who will sooner rather than later learn painful lesson…
[deleted]
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#18Personally speaking, it just struck me as odd that - outside of some rare exceptions - that someone could be so dumb that he'd actually be ignorant of his ineptitude. This is different than misrepresenting your ability. Lots of people do that for lots of reasons, but for someone to be so sheerly ignorant as is often given in the case examples struck me as someone who will sooner rather than later learn painful lesson…
The people I know who fall into this category construct an elaborate world view where they are the constant victim of all the idiots and jerks of the world. Everything that goes wrong is someone else’s fault, not their own ignorance and bad choices.
In other words, the Dunning-Kruger effect is a by product of deep narcissism (as opposed to sheer stupidity or ignorance, making it a palatably sinister pathological fungal outgrowth, truly scary).
They say these anti social personality disorders only represent 1-2% of society, but I always try to look at the results of a society to infer the true percentage.
I’d say Nazi Germany had a particular anti social personality disorder at scale, over 50%.
I’ll let you guys infer where everyone else is at now days.
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#19Isn't the Dunning-Kruger effect about personal mastery, and not comparative social science?
Re: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
#20Personally speaking, it just struck me as odd that - outside of some rare exceptions - that someone could be so dumb that he'd actually be ignorant of his ineptitude. This is different than misrepresenting your ability. Lots of people do that for lots of reasons, but for someone to be so sheerly ignorant as is often given in the case examples struck me as someone who will sooner rather than later learn painful lesson…
IMO, like many things interpreted at a surface level, it’s easy to miss the detail.
“Dumb” is the wrong descriptor. If you’ve ever worked in a politicized environment, it’s easy to observe spectacularly talented people who are uniquely unqualified to do whatever they are doing. Those are usually good at something else, and those skills generally allow them to avoid consequences for their incompetence, unless they get unlucky.
Another common scenario you see in business is when attorneys get put in charge of things, or talented salesmen get put into non-sales executive jobs.