Construct · 1 fields · 3 citations
One name. One construct. A landmark on the map.
● anchor · a standalone construct Nearest construct by meaningfalse-consensus effectcompare the meaningsEvery construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to Dunning-Kruger effect is false-consensus effect.
Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.
A single standalone construct; nearby constructs are located against it in the Collider. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
Next
See how Dunning-Kruger effect sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.
Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this entryCited on this page?
If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.
Claim your construct
Social Psychology
The tendency of low performers to overestimate their own competenceJustin Kruger and David Dunning first identified the effect in 1999 in Unskilled and unaware of it, reporting that people who scored in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, logic, and grammar substantially overestimated their own performance, while the highest scorers slightly underestimated theirs. They attributed the pattern to a metacognitive shortfall, meaning a difficulty in judging one's own thinking: the same limited skill that produces poor performance also limits a person's ability to recognize that the performance is poor, so the least competent are the least equipped to gauge their own competence. David Dunning's 2011 review consolidated a decade of replications across many domains and framed the effect as a general problem of self-insight rather than a quirk of any one task. The construct is distinctive in that it places objective performance and self-assessment on the same scale and studies the gap between them, and it is identified by comparing a person's predicted percentile rank against their actual rank within a single sample rather than by asking people about their confidence in the abstract.[1][2][3]