A rational model of the Dunning–Kruger effect supports insensitivity to evidence in low performers

Rachel A. Jansen, Anna N. Rafferty, Thomas L. Griffiths

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Evaluating one’s own performance on a task, typically known as ‘self-assessment’, is perceived as a fundamental skill, but people appear poorly calibrated to their abilities. Studies seem to show poorer calibration for low performers than for high performers, which could indicate worse metacognitive ability among low performers relative to others (the Dunning–Kruger effect). By developing a rational model of self-assessment, we show that such an effect could be produced by two psychological mechanisms, in either isolation or conjunction: influence of prior beliefs about ability or a relation between performance and skill at determining correctness on each problem. To disentangle these explanations, we conducted a large-scale replication of a seminal paper with approximately 4,000 participants in each of two studies. Comparing the predictions of two variants of our rational model provides support for low performers being less able to estimate whether they are correct in the domains of grammar and logical reasoning.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)756-763
Number of pages8
JournalNature Human Behaviour
Volume5
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2021

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A rational model of the Dunning–Kruger effect supports insensitivity to evidence in low performers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this