3 ms·
There is an easy reframing that works well. People that are "poor" at something don't know enough to know just how good someone can be at something. And this
by taeric 5y ago
There is an easy reframing that works well. People that are "poor" at something don't know enough to know just how good someone can be at something.
And this tracks for most skills. How good are you at tying your shoes? Probably average? Just how good can you get? Probably not that much better, all told. It is a clearly defined goal and likely has a limit on the skill you can build.
What about writing your name? Putting on your clothes? Making your bed? All things that are somewhat bound in just how good you can be.
Now, throw in something like "play the piano." Turns out, the expertise bar is much much higher suddenly. But, it you haven't been trying, how would you know?
- CRConrad 5y agoObligatory Shoelace Site page: https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/knots.htm https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/knots.htm (My recommendations are: When you really need your laces to hold, the Mega Ian Shoelace Knot - https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/megaianknot.htm https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/megaianknot.htm ; and for most shoes and definitely all laced boots (and absolutely for ice skates!), the Over Under Lacing: https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/overunderlacing.htm https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/overunderlacing.htm .)
- bryanrasmussen 5y agoIf someone asked me how bad are you at playing the piano, having never tried, I would say I was totally incompetent which I take to mean the worst possible. According to DK I should somehow be worse than that.
- taeric 5y agoSorta. According to DK, your Skill is 0. Your estimate is 0. So.... you were accurate. (That is, you literally couldn't under estimate your skill.) This obviously complicates the analysis that says poorly skilled don't under estimate to the degree that highly skilled do.
- seoaeu 5y ago> And this tracks for most skills. How good are you at tying your shoes? Probably average? In fact, this is pretty much what the Dunning-Kruger graphs look like. The article shows the one for humor which has the bottom quartile participants answer "eh, about average" while the top quarter of participants realize they're better than average, but estimate roughly 75-percentile rather than 87.5-percentile.