4 ms·

instead of linking to the entire blog can you link to the specific post you are trying to highlight please.

by tjmaxal 16y ago

bfung 16y ago
and here it is. but the other reads are pretty good as well. http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/11/the-dunning-kruger-effect/ http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/11/the-dunning-kruger-ef...
- cynicalkane 16y ago
  The Dunning-Kruger effect is about mis-rating yourself with respect to a known field, such as one's abilities in reasoning, grammar and humor compared to the average distributions of skill in that area (the original areas studied). This article talks about things completely unrelated, such as misjuding one's own skill at Street Fighter because one is unaware that a hardcore scene in that game even exists. If that scene did not exist, the hypothetical amateur Street Fighter player would be none the wiser--yet he would no longer be "misjudging" himself due to his own "incompetence". It looks like the author himself is suffering the Dunning-Kruger effect, spouting pop psychology nonsense in an authoritative tone.
  - eavc 16y ago
    Well, you're right to criticize the author's post, at least. Newer research shows that, for easy tasks, the better you are at it, the most likely you are to accurately assess your abilities. For hard tasks, though, it is the least talented who are best able to assess their level of skill. This conflicts with the original Dunning-Kruger hypothesis which said that the most talented generally would be more accurate overall. So the example of thinking you're some kind of Street Fighter badass because you're undefeated in your neighborhood is a highly likely scenario, but it's not the Dunning-Kruger effect. Even less appropriate an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect would be a prize-winning journalist (the author) making some slight errors in a blog post, which is what you claim in your last sentence. Hypothetically, though, an internet commenter who thinks he is a psychology expert but then goes to make an even worse mistake in his attempt to pedantically correct the original author, might be.

instead of linking to the entire blog can you link to the specific post you are trying to highlight please.

by tjmaxal 16y ago

instead of linking to the entire blog can you link to the specific post you are trying to highlight please.

bfung 16y ago

and here it is. but the other reads are pretty good as well. http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/11/the-dunning-kruger-effect/ http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/11/the-dunning-kruger-ef...

cynicalkane 16y ago
The Dunning-Kruger effect is about mis-rating yourself with respect to a known field, such as one's abilities in reasoning, grammar and humor compared to the average distributions of skill in that area (the original areas studied). This article talks about things completely unrelated, such as misjuding one's own skill at Street Fighter because one is unaware that a hardcore scene in that game even exists. If that scene did not exist, the hypothetical amateur Street Fighter player would be none the wiser--yet he would no longer be "misjudging" himself due to his own "incompetence". It looks like the author himself is suffering the Dunning-Kruger effect, spouting pop psychology nonsense in an authoritative tone.
- eavc 16y ago
  Well, you're right to criticize the author's post, at least. Newer research shows that, for easy tasks, the better you are at it, the most likely you are to accurately assess your abilities. For hard tasks, though, it is the least talented who are best able to assess their level of skill. This conflicts with the original Dunning-Kruger hypothesis which said that the most talented generally would be more accurate overall. So the example of thinking you're some kind of Street Fighter badass because you're undefeated in your neighborhood is a highly likely scenario, but it's not the Dunning-Kruger effect. Even less appropriate an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect would be a prize-winning journalist (the author) making some slight errors in a blog post, which is what you claim in your last sentence. Hypothetically, though, an internet commenter who thinks he is a psychology expert but then goes to make an even worse mistake in his attempt to pedantically correct the original author, might be.