RAT re: National Socialist Grammar

[MMA <Diogenes_@compuserve.com>]

The New York Times
January 18, 2000


Among the Inept, Researchers Discover, Ignorance Is Bliss
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
By ERICA GOODE

There are many incompetent people in the world. Dr. David A. Dunning is
haunted by the fear he might be one of them. 

Dr. Dunning, a professor of psychology at Cornell, worries about this
because, according to his research, most incompetent people do not know
that they are incompetent. 

On the contrary. People who do things badly, Dr. Dunning has found in
studies conducted with a graduate student, Justin Kruger, are usually
supremely confident of their abilities -- more confident, in fact, than
people who do things well. 

"I began to think that there were probably lots of things that I was bad at
and I didn't know it," Dr. Dunning said. 

One reason that the ignorant also tend to be the blissfully self-assured,
the researchers believe, is that the skills required for competence often
are the same skills necessary to recognize competence. 

The incompetent, therefore, suffer doubly, they suggested in a paper
appearing in the December issue of the Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 

"Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices,
but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it," wrote Dr.
Kruger, now an assistant professor at the University of Illinois, and Dr.
Dunning. 

This deficiency in "self-monitoring skills," the researchers said, helps
explain the tendency of the humor-impaired to persist in telling jokes that
are not funny, of day traders to repeatedly jump into the market -- and
repeatedly lose out -- and of the politically clueless to continue holding
forth at dinner parties on the fine points of campaign strategy. 

Some college students, Dr. Dunning said, evince a similar blindness: after
doing badly on a test, they spend hours in his office, explaining why the
answers he suggests for the test questions are wrong. 

In a series of studies, Dr. Kruger and Dr. Dunning tested their theory of
incompetence. They found that subjects who scored in the lowest quartile on
tests of logic, English grammar and humor were also the most likely to
"grossly overestimate" how well they had performed. 

In all three tests, subjects' ratings of their ability were positively
linked to their actual scores. But the lowest-ranked participants showed
much greater distortions in their self-estimates. Asked to evaluate their
performance on the test of logical reasoning, for example, subjects who
scored only in the 12th percentile guessed that they had scored in the 62nd
percentile, and deemed their overall skill at logical reasoning to be at
the 68th percentile. 

Similarly, subjects who scored at the 10th percentile on the grammar test
ranked themselves at the 67th percentile in the ability to "identify
grammatically correct standard English," and estimated their test scores to
be at the 61st percentile. 

On the humor test, in which participants were asked to rate jokes according
to their funniness (subjects' ratings were matched against those of an
"expert" panel of professional comedians), low-scoring subjects were also
more apt to have an inflated perception of their skill. But because humor
is idiosyncratically defined, the researchers said, the results were less
conclusive. 

Unlike their unskilled counterparts, the most able subjects in the study,
Dr. Kruger and Dr. Dunning found, were likely to underestimate their own
competence. The researchers attributed this to the fact that, in the
absence of information about how others were doing, highly competent
subjects assumed that others were performing as well as they were -- a
phenomenon psychologists term the "false consensus effect." 

When high scoring subjects were asked to "grade" the grammar tests of their
peers, however, they quickly revised their evaluations of their own
performance. In contrast, the self-assessments of those who scored badly
themselves were unaffected by the experience of grading others; some
subjects even further inflated their estimates of their own abilities. 

"Incompetent individuals were less able to recognize competence in others,"
the researchers concluded. 

In a final experiment, Dr. Dunning and Dr. Kruger set out to discover if
training would help modify the exaggerated self-perceptions of incapable
subjects. In fact, a short training session in logical reasoning did
improve the ability of low-scoring subjects to assess their performance
realistically, they found. 

The findings, the psychologists said, support Thomas Jefferson's assertion
that "he who knows best knows how little he knows." 

And the research meshes neatly with other work indicating that
overconfidence is a common; studies have found, for example, that the vast
majority of people rate themselves as "above average" on a wide array of
abilities -- though such an abundance of talent would be impossible in
statistical terms. And this overestimation, studies indicate, is more
likely for tasks that are difficult than for those that are easy. 

Such studies are not without critics. Dr. David C. Funder, a psychology
professor at the University of California at Riverside, for example, said
he suspected that most lay people had only a vague idea of the meaning of
"average" in statistical terms. 

"I'm not sure the average person thinks of 'average' or 'percentile' in
quite that literal a sense," Dr. Funder said, "so 'above average' might
mean to them 'pretty good,' or 'O.K.,' or 'doing all right.' And if, in
fact, people mean something subjective when they use the word, then it's
really hard to evaluate whether they're right or wrong using the
statistical criterion." 

But Dr. Dunning said his current research and past studies indicated that
there were many reasons why people would tend to overestimate their
competency, and not be aware of it. 

In some cases, Dr. Dunning pointed out, an awareness of one's own inability
is inevitable: "In a golf game, when your ball is heading into the woods,
you know you're incompetent," he said. 

But in other situations, feedback is absent, or at least more ambiguous;
even a humorless joke, for example, is likely to be met with polite
laughter. And faced with incompetence, social norms prevent most people
from blurting out "You stink!" -- truthful though this assessment may be. 

All of which inspired in Dr. Dunning and his co-author, in presenting their
research to the public, a certain degree of nervousness. 

"This article may contain faulty logic, methodological errors or poor
communication," they cautioned in their journal report. "Let us assure our
readers that to the extent this article is imperfect, it is not a sin we
have committed knowingly."