PDA

View Full Version : Conspiracy theorists and the Dunning-Kruger effect


Cl1mh4224rd
23rd June 2007, 09:44 AM
I just became aware of this thanks to Digg. It was submitted there referring to that site's members, but I think it fits the truther (and conspiracy theorists in general).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect is the phenomenon whereby people who have little knowledge systematically think that they know more than others who have much more knowledge.

[...] As Dunning and Kruger noted, "Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd."

[...]

A followup study suggests that grossly incompetent students improve both their skill level and their ability to estimate their class rank only after extensive tutoring in the skills they had previously lacked.


Yes, this applies to the population as a whole, but conspiracy theorists seem to be much more "vocal" about their perceived superiority. I thought it was kind of interesting.

Unsecured Coins
23rd June 2007, 10:00 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/powers05/salma_hayek.jpg

pomeroo
23rd June 2007, 10:01 AM
I just became aware of this thanks to Digg. It was submitted there referring to that site's members, but I think it fits the truther (and conspiracy theorists in general).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect




Yes, this applies to the population as a whole, but conspiracy theorists seem to be much more "vocal" about their perceived superiority. I thought it was kind of interesting.



I am delighted to learn that this increasingly observable phenomenon has a name. I had been calling it, Aggressive Stupidity.

Dr Adequate
23rd June 2007, 02:19 PM
Kruger and Dunning's paper (.pdf) (http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf)

Par
23rd June 2007, 02:22 PM
It sounds interesting, and I haven't read the paper, but how does one test for humour?

Kage
23rd June 2007, 02:48 PM
It sounds interesting, and I haven't read the paper, but how does one test for humour?

No soap, radio.

Unsecured Coins
23rd June 2007, 03:13 PM
you're mocking me, aren't you?

RADIO!!

(laughter)

jhunter1163
23rd June 2007, 03:46 PM
There's no thread that can't be improved by a well-timed pair of breasts.

uk_dave
23rd June 2007, 03:54 PM
D&K?

I thought maybe it was named after Dylan avery and..... someone else...but can't think of a name beginning with 'k'....any help?

Mr.D
23rd June 2007, 04:34 PM
D&K?

I thought maybe it was named after Dylan avery and..... someone else...but can't think of a name beginning with 'k'....any help?

Killtown?

Totovader
23rd June 2007, 04:46 PM
Except for this part...

4. if they can be trained to substantially improve their own skill level, these individuals can recognize and acknowledge their own previous lack of skill.

boloboffin
23rd June 2007, 05:15 PM
How Kruger and Dunning tested for humor:

They took 30 jokes and submitted them to professional comedians for ranking on an eleven-point scale. Out of eight comedians who responded, seven ranked the jokes very closely to each other, so that seven-comedian scale was used.

Then 65 Cornell University undergrads from a variety of departments also ranked the jokes, and then ranked where they would fall in consistently ranking funny jokes. The bottom quartile vastly overrated where they would fall on the scale, and only the upper quartile underestimated their "expertise".

Cl1mh4224rd
24th June 2007, 10:20 AM
Except for this part...


Well, it is qualified with an "if". ;)