Live data from Hacker News

The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

mcgill.ca

21–30 of 191 posts

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#23
Regardless of whether Dunning-Kruger is real the solution is the same. DK concerns poor performing people who cannot accurately address their performance relative to a group. Forget DK. The bigger problem is missing objectivity, which is a very real concern. So, just measure for objectivity.

Can they measure things or do they just guess? Are they willing to seek evidence? Even if evidence is immediately available will they use it? Everybody has bias, but is their bias primarily self-oriented?

The consequences for poor objectivity are profound and measurable, but then its an invisible failure for people that struggle with this in the first place. In many industries poor objectivity can result in termination, law suits, criminal penalties, physical harm, and more. Software just seems to pretend this is vapor.

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#24

The strict academic definition hasn’t followed the colloquial usage for a long time. Maybe ever: If a specific novice is over-confident and out of their depth, we say “Dunning-Kruger” If a specific is under-confident and performing better than their self-estimate, that’s not commonly considered Dunning Kruger, in the colloquial use. It’s called imposter syndrome, or not labeled at all. The researchers aren’t really d…

You've hit the nail on the head, it's a conditional defenition, rather than an absolute one.

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#25

> The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real Self-deception by any other name is still self-deception. The Dunning-Kruger effect also applies to smart people. You don't stop when you are estimating your ability correctly. As you learn more, you gain more awareness of your ignorance and continue being conservative with your self-estimates. But overall I think real intelligence by definition requires empathy and hu…

I think the Dunning-Kreuger effect is more pernicious in smart people. I think Engineer’s Disease is basically DK by another name.

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#26
While the pop-culture notion of the Dunning-Kruger Effect is "idiots don't know they're idiots," the actual results of the paper were (essentially) that F students thought they were D students, whereas the A students thought they were B students. The argument here seems to be that the original effect is explained as essentially a kind of reversion of the mean argument (people assume themselves to be more average than they are), but I don't entirely buy that--especially since the simulation results they present don't really look like the original Dunning-Kruger results, since the crossover point is in the wrong place, and that's actually kind of significant in the original analysis...

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#27
post #10
post #4

It’s obviously real, at least as used in conversation, whether it meets some rigorous definition I’m sure there’s an out, but we’ve all known these people. With vibe coding they’re everywhere. Is this going to be a modern “begging the question” where everyone knows what you mean but someone pipes up that actually the technical meaning is different?

The problem is that the original formulation was "most people" are unaware of being unskilled, but by now the name is used to mean "some group of people" is unaware of being unskilled. In that sense the article confirms that “a small number are", 5-6%, and therefore the effect exists in the colloquial sense but not in the scientific sense. Mentioning the Dunning-Krueger effect incorrectly is wonderfully meta...

I've seen at least 3 different ideas on this topic:

- people not skilled in a thing are bad at estimating their skills

- people are generally bad at estimating their skills

- people skilled in a particular areas often feel they are intellectually fit in other areas

Out of these three I feel like there's some truth in it, at least anecdotally.

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#28
There are so many strange things about the original Dunning-Kruger plot. Why use quartiles for one axis and percentile for the other? Why use higher precision for the subject's estimate, which is by definition imprecise, and lower precision for the true score, which is known precisely?

I think the only conclusion you can draw from that plot is everyone thinks they'll be in the third quartile.

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#29
Maybe this is reveals more about me than anyone else but the whole usage of dunning-kruger is just another arrow in the quiver for media to talk down to a group that they dismiss because they have different priorities.

I find references to the effect in pop culture are almost always used in an insulting, smug manner.

Re: The Dunning-Kruger effect may just be a data artefact (2020)

#30
Excessive willful/unwillful ignorance is the root cause of someone exhibiting the Dunning-Kruger Effect. We've all at some point worked or lived with someone with real illusions/delusions about their abilities, and the root of it is ignorance. There's little we can do in our workplaces to mitigate these people. Word of advice from my experience: Never co-found a vc-backed software startup with someone that's done genuine innovation....and been completely ignorant and oblivious about everything else.
Post reply on HN