4 ms·

What do you mean "reversed"? DK says that both low and high skilled people estimate themselves as close to average, due to the obvious bias in one's available d

by hilop 10y ago

What do you mean "reversed"? DK says that both low and high skilled people estimate themselves as close to average, due to the obvious bias in one's available data

dahart 10y ago
I mean that for difficult tasks, people who are unskilled rate themselves as unskilled, and people that are skilled rate themselves as skilled. "Our studies replicate, eliminate, or reverse the association between task performance and judgment accuracy reported by Kruger and Dunning (1999) as a function of task difficulty. On easy tasks, where there is a positive bias, the best performers are also the most accurate in estimating their standing, but on difficult tasks, where there is a negative bias, the worst performers are the most accurate. This pattern is consistent with a combination of noisy estimates and overall bias, with no need to invoke differences in metacognitive abilities. In this regard, our findings support Krueger and Mueller’s (2002) reinterpretation of Kruger and Dunning’s (1999) findings. An association between task-related skills and metacognitive insight may indeed exist, and later we offer some suggestions for ways to test for it. However, our analyses indicate that the primary drivers of errors in judging relative standing are general inaccuracy and overall biases tied to task difficulty. Thus, it is important to know more about those sources of error in order to better understand and ameliorate them." Burson KA, Larrick RP, & Klayman J (2006). Skilled or unskilled, but still unaware of it: how perceptions of difficulty drive miscalibration in relative comparisons. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90 (1), 60-77 PMID: 16448310
- ninjakeyboard 10y ago
  To clarify, I think what he is saying is that the effect exists on both ends. On the low skill side it's over confidence and on the high skill side it's imposter syndrome. It's the same effect. You are both saying the same thing.

by hilop 10y ago

What do you mean "reversed"? DK says that both low and high skilled people estimate themselves as close to average, due to the obvious bias in one's available data

dahart 10y ago

I mean that for difficult tasks, people who are unskilled rate themselves as unskilled, and people that are skilled rate themselves as skilled. "Our studies replicate, eliminate, or reverse the association between task performance and judgment accuracy reported by Kruger and Dunning (1999) as a function of task difficulty. On easy tasks, where there is a positive bias, the best performers are also the most accurate in estimating their standing, but on difficult tasks, where there is a negative bias, the worst performers are the most accurate. This pattern is consistent with a combination of noisy estimates and overall bias, with no need to invoke differences in metacognitive abilities. In this regard, our findings support Krueger and Mueller’s (2002) reinterpretation of Kruger and Dunning’s (1999) findings. An association between task-related skills and metacognitive insight may indeed exist, and later we offer some suggestions for ways to test for it. However, our analyses indicate that the primary drivers of errors in judging relative standing are general inaccuracy and overall biases tied to task difficulty. Thus, it is important to know more about those sources of error in order to better understand and ameliorate them." Burson KA, Larrick RP, & Klayman J (2006). Skilled or unskilled, but still unaware of it: how perceptions of difficulty drive miscalibration in relative comparisons. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90 (1), 60-77 PMID: 16448310

ninjakeyboard 10y ago
To clarify, I think what he is saying is that the effect exists on both ends. On the low skill side it's over confidence and on the high skill side it's imposter syndrome. It's the same effect. You are both saying the same thing.