I don’t understand the sentence: “In two of the four cases, there’s an obvious positive correlation between perceived skill and actual skill, which is the opposite of the pop-sci conception of Dunning-Kruger.” I’m not seeing such correlation on any of the graphs, as I’m interpreting the “actual skill” to match “Actual test score” on the graph. Could someone shine some light on what author meant by this?
I never understood Dunning-Kruger to mean that the competent rate themselves as less skilled than the incompetent, just that the incompetent tend to overrate their own ability due to lack of a fuller understanding of what they don’t know, while the competent tend to be more aware of their weaknesses. That’s exactly what the graphs show to me.
The first and fourth graphs show the same trend. Perceptual is a compressed version of actual, but the slope is trending upward. Low achievers rate themselves lower than high achievers.
This is in contrast to the popsci version of “experts think they’re idiots; idiots think they’re experts.” That would show a negative slope.
I don’t understand the sentence: “In two of the four cases, there’s an obvious positive correlation between perceived skill and actual skill, which is the opposite of the pop-sci conception of Dunning-Kruger.” I’m not seeing such correlation on any of the graphs, as I’m interpreting the “actual skill” to match “Actual test score” on the graph. Could someone shine some light on what author meant by this?
I never understood Dunning-Kruger to mean that the competent rate themselves as less skilled than the incompetent, just that the incompetent tend to overrate their own ability due to lack of a fuller understanding of what they don’t know, while the competent tend to be more aware of their weaknesses. That’s exactly what the graphs show to me.
The first and fourth graphs show the same trend. Perceptual is a compressed version of actual, but the slope is trending upward. Low achievers rate themselves lower than high achievers.
This is in contrast to the popsci version of “experts think they’re idiots; idiots think they’re experts.” That would show a negative slope.