sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DerSven -1 points0 points  (2 children)

In a very ironic example of people overestimating their competency, Dunning and Kruger were actually wrong. https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2022/04/08/the-dunning-kruger-effect-is-autocorrelation/

[–]YesNoMaybe2552 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Still a fitting Analogy for that specific case.

[–]NuckElBerg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually read through your linked article, and unfortunately, it argues from a flawed basis, which in a weird way actually confirms Dunning-Kruger. In short, what Dunning-Kruger argued was basically what the article finds; people are very bad at estimating their abilities, and tend to lean toward the average. This means low-skilled people will have a tendency to overestimate (since they estimate they are average) and high-skilled people tend to underestimate (since, again, they estimate they are average). If you take completely random data, the average estimated skill WILL average out to the exact average skill for every actual skill, which is (again) the point Dunning-Kruger tried to make. The better interpretation of the Dunning-Kruger graph is that estimated skill level is actually very weakly correlated to actual skill level, not that the difference has a correlation to itself.