Slashdot Mirror
We Are All Confident Idiots
An anonymous reader writes: If you've ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect, you'll be familiar with David Dunning, professor of psychology at Cornell. He's written an article on the "psychology of human wrongness," explaining how confidence in one's answers tends to be high for people who don't know what they're talking about. He says, "What's curious is that, in many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge."
Dunning goes on: "A whole battery of studies conducted by myself and others have confirmed that people who don't know much about a given set of cognitive, technical, or social skills tend to grossly overestimate their prowess and performance, whether it's grammar, emotional intelligence, logical reasoning, firearm care and safety, debating, or financial knowledge. College students who hand in exams that will earn them Ds and Fs tend to think their efforts will be worthy of far higher grades; low-performing chess players, bridge players, and medical students, and elderly people applying for a renewed driver's license, similarly overestimate their competence by a long shot."
Dunning goes on: "A whole battery of studies conducted by myself and others have confirmed that people who don't know much about a given set of cognitive, technical, or social skills tend to grossly overestimate their prowess and performance, whether it's grammar, emotional intelligence, logical reasoning, firearm care and safety, debating, or financial knowledge. College students who hand in exams that will earn them Ds and Fs tend to think their efforts will be worthy of far higher grades; low-performing chess players, bridge players, and medical students, and elderly people applying for a renewed driver's license, similarly overestimate their competence by a long shot."
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
People who know their stuff also know just how little they really know, and they tend to be cautious with their answers. People who don't, but know just enough to THINK they know a lot lack that inhibition. And they won't hesitate to use this to assert they know a lot. This in turn will be seen as determination and having a vision by management and now take a wild guess who will be in charge of making all the important decisions.
And sometimes I can't help but wonder if knowing too much is actually keeping people from climbing the corporate ladder. It seems, the less you know, the higher your chance that you'll end up at the C-Level.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" - Charles Darwin
When someone says, "Any fool can see
Politicians actually don't have any of their own confidence, they take yours. That's the whole schtick to politics these days: Gain The People's Confidence. They each know how full of shit they are, and more importantly, they know how full of shit you are.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
This is why deliberate practice, as described by K Anders Ericsson, is so important. Deliberate practice is what makes experts, and summarizes in three simple concepts: goal-oriented behavior; a focus on technique; and constant, immediate feedback.
By deliberate practice, a person is *looking* for their flaws, setting goals to push their competence, and immediately getting burned when they push beyond their abilities. This style of practice aims to draw attention to those behaviors which are incorrect--gaps in knowledge, weakness in skill--so that a person may reconcile these things and improve.
Such practice continuously slims down the level of overconfidence, even as confidence increases. A person is appraised of their shortcomings, but also reduces them, simultaneously becoming more skilled and more aware of the weaknesses in their skill in that area.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
She asked me, "how do you know you are a good computer technician"
Me, "because I know how little I really know. When I was a good amateur, I thought I knew a lot, and was confident, but now, I know so much more that I know what I don't know. That makes me a good technician."
She was confused, but I now I know there there is a scientific name for what I was trying to explain.
The problem here is that Prof. Dunning's principle could apply to anybody, including college professors.
So how does he know he is correct?
It's a good joke, but it's also the key realization that led to the use of double-blind studies. Someone had published a paper to the effect that no human studies could be trusted, because the observer effect would taint the study. It was a really depressing paper until someone pointed out that it was itself based on human studies, and thus the conclusion shouldn't be taken too seriously. More serious contemplation of the problem eventually led to double-blind studies being the norm for serious work.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I'd like to coin a new phrase: The Kruger Hump.
This is the inflection point where you realize just how little you actually know. Up to that point is marked by the D-K effect.
As John Cleese pointed out, you need a minimum level of intelligence to even realize that you are stupid.
Sadly, a huge percentage of the population is too stupid to realize that they're morons.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.