41–50 of 75 posts
Not enough evidence in the paper. And does anyone feel like this effect is not real in this year of all years? People were screaming 'fake news', 'fake virus', 'fake election', blah blah with great conviction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
I 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.
Will your comment change anything? Of course not, both people arguing will just assume that the other one is the stupid person.
Does 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 :)…
1. the DK-effect supposedly increases the noisier subjects estimates of their abilities are, 2. the graph relies on breaking the data into quartiles 3. experts are less noisy in their estimates of their abilities than are non-experts.
There is also the paper: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1...
Still I think the article does a disservice in not laying out the argument in plain language. I don't particularly feel like puzzling it out
The article doesn't explain what is actually going on to produce the second chart, but here is a guess. Assume people have a true ability x , an estimated ability y which is x + some unbiased noise, and a test score z which is also x + some unbiased noise. If you take a sample and collect the lowest quartile of test scores z , then the average of the estimated abilities y in that group is higher than z because the y…
Lowest test scores come from low ability plus bad luck and as such are lower than just low ability and highest test scores come from high ability and great luck and as such are higher than just high ability.
The article doesn't explain what is actually going on to produce the second chart, but here is a guess. Assume people have a true ability x , an estimated ability y which is x + some unbiased noise, and a test score z which is also x + some unbiased noise. If you take a sample and collect the lowest quartile of test scores z , then the average of the estimated abilities y in that group is higher than z because the y…
"It's not my fault for losing this; I am clearly better than the team/oponents if it weren't for bad teammates/cheese tactics/meta abuse/lags/etc" is a mindset a lot of players have even if all evidence points to the contrary (~50% winrate in average in matches with players of similar ranking etc.).
In fact, I struggled quite some time with this myself - acknowledging and understanding one's own shittiness is one of the very first steps of actual improvement, and that's usually easier said than done, at least for me personally.
As I say, "Citations of Dunning-Kruger are usually examples of it."
In my experience Dunning-Kruger 100% is there but in the following form: "knowledgeable people doubt, and less people know they are more confident." It is even amazing sometimes, how confidently people without any knowledge talk and give opinion about subjects that need high level of knowledge, just to even begin to ponder about it. And again, it can be my bias.
I don't know why your response got down voted. Maybe some rather specific people got their panties in a twist. Either way, what you said is something Bertrand Russel (certainly not best known for being a dumb man) once worded like this: "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." .. and just for good measure, here is another one o…
It is like that brain melting sentence "If I say that I am lying, am I lying?"
If I claim that Dunning-Kruger Effect is 100% real is it really real? :)
Marry Christmas and Happy Holidays everyone!