The Dunning-Kruger Effect

[bluegreenearth]

From Psychology Today: (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basi ... ger-effect)

Dunning-Kruger Effect
The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area. This tends to occur because a lack of self-awareness prevents them from accurately assessing their own skills.

Understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect
The concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect is based on a 1999 paper by Cornell University psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. The pair tested participants on their logic, grammar, and sense of humor, and found that those who performed in the bottom quartile rated their skills far above average. For example, those in the 12th percentile self-rated their expertise to be, on average, in the 62nd percentile.

The researchers attributed the trend to a problem of metacognition—the ability to analyze one’s own thoughts or performance. “Those with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it,” they wrote.

What causes the Dunning-Kruger effect?
Confidence is so highly prized that many people would rather pretend to be smart or skilled than risk looking inadequate and losing face. Even smart people can be affected by the Dunning-Kruger effect because having intelligence isn’t the same thing as learning and developing a specific skill. Many individuals mistakenly believe that their experience and skills in one particular area are transferable to another.

Why do people fail to recognize their own incompetence?
Many people would describe themselves as above average in intelligence, humor, and a variety of skills. They can’t accurately judge their own competence, because they lack metacognition, or the ability to step back and examine oneself objectively. In fact, those who are the least skilled are also the most likely to overestimate their abilities.

Here is the link to the 1999 paper by David Dunning and Justin Kruger: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/U ... ebabc?p2df

Apparently, all of us are susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger Effect but few of us are consciously aware when we are exhibiting the diagnostic symptoms.

So, I'm compelled to consider if the Dunning-Kruger Effect best explains the arrogant confidence various untrained and unqualified pseudo-intellectuals have in their poorly researched and tragically misinformed objections to demonstrably reliable scientific theories which are rigorously and routinely tested by actual experts who are trained and qualified in their relevant fields?

If not the Dunning-Kruger Effect, what are other candidate explanations for this deleterious social phenomenon?

Is there a compassionate way to facilitate intellectual humility and help each other recognize when our confidence in a particular perspective is disproportionately high compared to our level of competence?

[Miles]

Apparently, all of us are susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger Effect but few of us are consciously aware when we are exhibiting the diagnostic symptoms.

So, I'm compelled to consider if the Dunning-Kruger Effect best explains the arrogant confidence various untrained and unqualified pseudo-intellectuals have in their poorly researched and tragically misinformed objections to demonstrably reliable scientific theories which are rigorously and routinely tested by actual experts who are trained and qualified in their relevant fields?

If not the Dunning-Kruger Effect, what are other candidate explanations for this deleterious social phenomenon?

Is there a compassionate way to facilitate intellectual humility and help each other recognize when our confidence in a particular perspective is disproportionately high compared to our level of competence?

I can't see any effort being worth the trouble. There are far more important mental health issues to spend time and money on. So let the Trump's of the world bellow all they want. I'm going fishing.


.

[William]

[Replying to Miles in post #2]

Is there a compassionate way to facilitate intellectual humility and help each other recognize when our confidence in a particular perspective is disproportionately high compared to our level of competence?

I recently stopped worrying about the possibility of 'putting a stumbling block in someone's way' re;
Paul
Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

as this can severely hamper any legitimate debate, and since we are here to actually debate, there is no requirement to pamper beliefs [be compassionate] for the sake of not offending someone or causing someone to even question their faith.

They should simply not be in a debating situation if they cannot handle their non-negotiable faith-based beliefs being put under the spotlight of truthfulness.
Since they are in debating situations and have chosen to be of their own volition, 'kid gloves' need not be worn on account of any emotional insecurities.

[JoeyKnothead]

Apparently, all of us are susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger Effect but few of us are consciously aware when we are exhibiting the diagnostic symptoms.

A problem for me here is how we determine where to draw the line. As with most or all the soft sciences, there's a lot of room for error in deciding close calls.

But for sure, there's a good bunch of us to suffer it.

So, I'm compelled to consider if the Dunning-Kruger Effect best explains the arrogant confidence various untrained and unqualified pseudo-intellectuals have in their poorly researched and tragically misinformed objections to demonstrably reliable scientific theories which are rigorously and routinely tested by actual experts who are trained and qualified in their relevant fields?

It'd be laughable if there were no real world consequences.

With Google and Facebook scholars multiplying like rabbits, it's only gonna get worse.

If not the Dunning-Kruger Effect, what are other candidate explanations for this deleterious social phenomenon?

Captured in the talons of religious belief. When your holy book is the only truth ya recognize, well there we go.

Is there a compassionate way to facilitate intellectual humility and help each other recognize when our confidence in a particular perspective is disproportionately high compared to our level of competence?

Start every response to em with, "Bless your heart, but..."

There's some folks that all the reasonings and logicings in the world just can't fix.

So while we try to be all polite and civil and all, we still need to push back with vigor.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to bluegreenearth in post #1]

If not the Dunning-Kruger Effect, what are other candidate explanations for this deleterious social phenomenon?

Arrogance, self righteousness, as well as a need to be 'better' (superiority) I'd think plays roles in this, as does a lack of education (be it taught poorly, not at all, or the individual having no desire to learn) and poor self esteem. After all, who doesn't like to be right?

Is there a compassionate way to facilitate intellectual humility and help each other recognize when our confidence in a particular perspective is disproportionately high compared to our level of competence?

Surely there is. But is it worth even trying to find and apply it? One can be compassionate as Mother Theresa on her best day times 10, and still 'offend' another (especially these days when everyone's an expert wearing their hearts on their sleeve, as well as 'getting a trophy for nothing'). I don't think you can teach humility past a certain, very young, age. Once that age is passed, it takes a big life event to make someone humble IMO.
Additionally, some don't deserve compassion IMO. These people are purposefully 'dim' (not the word I wanted to use but rules be rules and all that....), aggressive and arrogant.

[Purple Knight]

I don't think you can teach humility past a certain, very young, age.

I'm not humble at all but I'm very aware when I don't know something. I'm not sure how anybody could be unaware of it. When I don't know something, it bothers me, and seems to come up every second of every day, and there's only so much I can devote my time to learning about. Car engines is my particular example. I don't know how to fix them. It seems to come up every day, and makes me poignantly aware of my lack of knowledge, and uncomfortable.

So, I'm compelled to consider if the Dunning-Kruger Effect best explains the arrogant confidence various untrained and unqualified pseudo-intellectuals have in their poorly researched and tragically misinformed objections to demonstrably reliable scientific theories which are rigorously and routinely tested by actual experts who are trained and qualified in their relevant fields?

People have no obligation to trust conclusions they can't come to, themselves. In fact I will go so far as to say they shouldn't. Increasingly, a replicability crisis plagues all fields as capitalism has its way with science. You get the result big money wants, you get paid. You don't, no $$$. Amazing that this selects for shills and not scientific integrity.

[bluegreenearth]

People have no obligation to trust conclusions they can't come to, themselves. In fact I will go so far as to say they shouldn't. Increasingly, a replicability crisis plagues all fields as capitalism has its way with science. You get the result big money wants, you get paid. You don't, no $$$. Amazing that this selects for shills and not scientific integrity.

If this is consistently the case, how would you explain the consensus of climate scientists who agree that the global climate change we are currently experiencing is largely the result of our historic and continued use of fossil fuels? Is it not the case that a single fossil fuel exploration and production company has significantly more money than the combined incomes of all the environmental non-prophets in the world? If what you propose is the case, shouldn't we expect the majority of climate scientists to only publish results that appear to vindicate the fossil fuel industry?

[Purple Knight]

People have no obligation to trust conclusions they can't come to, themselves. In fact I will go so far as to say they shouldn't. Increasingly, a replicability crisis plagues all fields as capitalism has its way with science. You get the result big money wants, you get paid. You don't, no $$$. Amazing that this selects for shills and not scientific integrity.

If this is consistently the case, how would you explain the consensus of climate scientists who agree that the global climate change we are currently experiencing is largely the result of our historic and continued use of fossil fuels? Is it not the case that a single fossil fuel exploration and production company has significantly more money than the combined incomes of all the environmental non-prophets in the world? If what you propose is the case, shouldn't we expect the majority of climate scientists to only publish results that appear to vindicate the fossil fuel industry?

First of all I do agree that there is anthropogenic global warming. But it is also political and it seems there is big money behind sabotaging certain countries' energy-independence too, as well as big money behind selling the "green" label for more. Sometimes the oil companies are even behind it. I beg you to look to the proposed solutions and follow the money, and also you can watch Micheal Moore's documentary about green energy.



Really listen when he mentions the Koch brothers.

This is an issue that's dear to my heart, actually emblematic of the problem I mentioned, and I just don't know what to do about it. I can give you another example about soda-stream machines specifically but I gotta split.

And no, I wouldn't say it's consistently the case, yet. But it's definitely getting there. It's consistent enough for you to pick out an example where it happens to be very, very true. There's a massive trend for people interested in science to have scientific integrity, which the money hasn't completely overcome. But it will. It has to.

[William]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #8]

Of course this ties in with current situations developing re virus mandates...causing some early bird reactions from people across the social spectrum to make a stand now in relation to the bigger issue of trillionaires funding projects which seem to ignore the worlds common issues.

Not all folk are taking that stand because of conspiracy theories, but because they see a grim future in the way that things are done [and have been done] and are now willing to give up their place in the social structure [teachers, doctors, nurses etc...] and risk their wellbeing by refusing to take the jab.

Unfortunately, while it is impressive that such folk will take a stand, there do not appear to be any alternatives offered by them re 'what to do' in order to actually stop the vehicle driving 90 miles an hour down a dead end street.

What will most likely happen to those folk is they will start dropping dead from their choices, perhaps like a kind of sacrifice for the greater good, and between now and then, have no way to pay their debt to society and will create an extra burden on the systems they once gladly supported and now reject.

Strategically, that is madness...as in - unhelpful.

[TRANSPONDER]

From Psychology Today: (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basi ... ger-effect)

Dunning-Kruger Effect
The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area. This tends to occur because a lack of self-awareness prevents them from accurately assessing their own skills.

Understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect
The concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect is based on a 1999 paper by Cornell University psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. The pair tested participants on their logic, grammar, and sense of humor, and found that those who performed in the bottom quartile rated their skills far above average. For example, those in the 12th percentile self-rated their expertise to be, on average, in the 62nd percentile.

The researchers attributed the trend to a problem of metacognition—the ability to analyze one’s own thoughts or performance. “Those with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it,” they wrote.

What causes the Dunning-Kruger effect?
Confidence is so highly prized that many people would rather pretend to be smart or skilled than risk looking inadequate and losing face. Even smart people can be affected by the Dunning-Kruger effect because having intelligence isn’t the same thing as learning and developing a specific skill. Many individuals mistakenly believe that their experience and skills in one particular area are transferable to another.

Why do people fail to recognize their own incompetence?
Many people would describe themselves as above average in intelligence, humor, and a variety of skills. They can’t accurately judge their own competence, because they lack metacognition, or the ability to step back and examine oneself objectively. In fact, those who are the least skilled are also the most likely to overestimate their abilities.

Here is the link to the 1999 paper by David Dunning and Justin Kruger: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/U ... ebabc?p2df

Apparently, all of us are susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger Effect but few of us are consciously aware when we are exhibiting the diagnostic symptoms.

So, I'm compelled to consider if the Dunning-Kruger Effect best explains the arrogant confidence various untrained and unqualified pseudo-intellectuals have in their poorly researched and tragically misinformed objections to demonstrably reliable scientific theories which are rigorously and routinely tested by actual experts who are trained and qualified in their relevant fields?

If not the Dunning-Kruger Effect, what are other candidate explanations for this deleterious social phenomenon?

Is there a compassionate way to facilitate intellectual humility and help each other recognize when our confidence in a particular perspective is disproportionately high compared to our level of competence?

I have had to say a couple of times (and have had a lot of discussions about this in the past) that forums and debates of this kind rarely has experts in any of the disciplines and we all tend to be amateurs. Indeed the process of debating religious claims puts the expert at a disadvantage as the other side only has to switch from philosophy to Palaeontology, or Bibletext criticism to ancient near - eastern history to completely leave the Expert floundering. We have to be jacks of all trades and masters of none in order to be able to swim in these Arkanely deep Flood waters.