Why the unskilled are unaware¶
Ehrlinger, J., Johnson, K., Banner, M., Dunning, D., & Kruger, J. (2008). Why the unskilled are unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105(1), 98-121.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Dunning-Kruger Effect
- This is the core claim of the "double curse": low c not only produces poor performance but also degrades the internal observability needed to recognize the poor performance.
This sourceFive studies showing poor performers lack insight into their errors even with incentives; supports D16-104 (the metacognitive-access / self-surveillance double-curse claim).
SupportedVerified against the work's full text
Ehrlinger and colleagues report that "poor performers grossly overestimate their performances because their incompetence deprives them of the skills needed to recognize their deficits", and that five studies show poor performers lacking insight into their shortcomings even in real-world settings and when given incentives to be accurate. Their name for this pairing is a double curse: incompetence both produces the poor performance and removes the means of recognising it. The work's terms are metacognitive, so internal observability is the article's gloss, and the studies bear on self-insight rather than on a measured observability quantity.
“Their incompetence produces a double curse. First, their lack of skill, by definition, makes it difficult to produce correct responses and, thus, they make many mistakes. Second, this very same lack of skill also deprives them of success at the metacognitive task of recognizing when a particular decision is a correct or an incorrect one.”
- This is the core claim of the "double curse": low c not only produces poor performance but also degrades the internal observability needed to recognize the poor performance.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:f0e543343c04 · see in the full table