Wait a sec’. The author admits the effect has been confirmed by others, then claims it’s probably not real because of a pair of studies (both from the same team

Wait a sec’. The author admits the effect has been confirmed by others, then claims it’s probably not real because of a pair of studies (both from the same team) that even the authors admit support at least part of the Dunning-Kruger hypothesis (“It’s just that experts do that over a narrower range”). His confirmation is a couple of ad hoc unpublishable investigations? It’s almost like he might be overestimating his ability to evaluate the work. In particular, he seems to be more interested in refuting a popular perception of what the effect is rather than the more subtle claims that Dunning and Kruger actually made—another source of the type of errors predicted for those without expertise in a given field.