The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history)聽路
Article talk (
|
history)聽路
Watch
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose聽( talk 路 contribs) 23:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
路 路 路 |
I'll start by digesting the earlier review, at Talk:Dunning鈥揔ruger effect/GA1. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 23:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio check
Images
Definition
In the case of the Dunning鈥揔ruger effect, this applies mainly to people with low skill in a specific area trying to evaluate their competence within this area. The systematic error concerns their tendency to greatly overestimate their competence, i.e. to see themselves as more skilled than they are.- OK
According to psychologist Robert D. McIntosh et al.,- feels slightly awkward in the text, but perhaps less awkward than listing all the authors.
Measurement, analysis, and investigated tasks
The Dunning鈥揔ruger effect is present in both cases, but tends to be significantly more pronounced when done in relative terms. This means that people are usually more accurate when predicting their raw score than when assessing how well they did relative to their peer group.- no issues.
The strongest effect is seen for the participants in the bottom quartile, who tend to see themselves as being part of the top two quartiles when measured in relative terms- no issues
objective performances are often divided into four groups. They start from the bottom quartile of low performers and proceed to the top quartile of high performers- no issues
In some cases, these studies gather and compare data from many countriesIs this supported by the text? It has the example of a survey across 34 countries of the math skills of 15-year-olds but I didn;t immediately see another one that was across many countries.
Most of the studies are conducted in laboratories,from the cited sources?
We have observed this pattern of dramatic overestimation by bottom performers across a wide range of tasks in the lab鈥攆rom tests of logical reasoning and grammar skills (Kruger & Dunning, 1999) to more social abilities like emotional intelligence (Sheldon, Ames, & Dunning, 2010) and discerning which jokes are funny (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). We and others have also observed similar overestimation in real world settings as people tackle everyday tasks, such as hunters taking a quiz on firearm use and safety, based on one created by the National Rifle Association, at a Trap and Skeet competition (Ehrlinger, Johnson, Banner, Dunning, & Kruger, 2008), and laboratory technicians taking an exam about medical lab procedures and knowledge (Haun, Zerinque, Leach, & Foley, 2000). In all cases, top to bottom performers provide self-evaluations along percentile scales that largely replicate (Fig. 5.2).. The term "most" is implied but not explicitly spelled out. I reformulated it to be on the safe side. Phlsph7 ( talk) 12:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
If done afterward, the participants receive no independent clues during the performance as to how well they did- I haven't read this source; is this stated as absolutely in the source? I'd imagine, for example, that if it was face to face, there could be some unconscious clues.
...no feedback is delivered during the quiz itself..... You are probably right that an interviewer may inadvertently give away clues. But if that had a significant impact then it would spoil the measurement. If the formulation is a problem, we could change it to "should receive no independent clues". Phlsph7 ( talk) 12:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Explanations
The metacognitive lack may hinder some people from becoming better by hiding their flaws from them.- no issues.
Practical significance
Ehrlinger et al. 2008, pp. 98鈥121.- is it possible to be more specific about the relevant part of the source?
In 2000, Kruger and Dunning were awarded the satirical Ig Nobel Prize- no issues.
Lead
Sources
General comments
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history)聽路
Article talk (
|
history)聽路
Watch
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose聽( talk 路 contribs) 23:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
路 路 路 |
I'll start by digesting the earlier review, at Talk:Dunning鈥揔ruger effect/GA1. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 23:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio check
Images
Definition
In the case of the Dunning鈥揔ruger effect, this applies mainly to people with low skill in a specific area trying to evaluate their competence within this area. The systematic error concerns their tendency to greatly overestimate their competence, i.e. to see themselves as more skilled than they are.- OK
According to psychologist Robert D. McIntosh et al.,- feels slightly awkward in the text, but perhaps less awkward than listing all the authors.
Measurement, analysis, and investigated tasks
The Dunning鈥揔ruger effect is present in both cases, but tends to be significantly more pronounced when done in relative terms. This means that people are usually more accurate when predicting their raw score than when assessing how well they did relative to their peer group.- no issues.
The strongest effect is seen for the participants in the bottom quartile, who tend to see themselves as being part of the top two quartiles when measured in relative terms- no issues
objective performances are often divided into four groups. They start from the bottom quartile of low performers and proceed to the top quartile of high performers- no issues
In some cases, these studies gather and compare data from many countriesIs this supported by the text? It has the example of a survey across 34 countries of the math skills of 15-year-olds but I didn;t immediately see another one that was across many countries.
Most of the studies are conducted in laboratories,from the cited sources?
We have observed this pattern of dramatic overestimation by bottom performers across a wide range of tasks in the lab鈥攆rom tests of logical reasoning and grammar skills (Kruger & Dunning, 1999) to more social abilities like emotional intelligence (Sheldon, Ames, & Dunning, 2010) and discerning which jokes are funny (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). We and others have also observed similar overestimation in real world settings as people tackle everyday tasks, such as hunters taking a quiz on firearm use and safety, based on one created by the National Rifle Association, at a Trap and Skeet competition (Ehrlinger, Johnson, Banner, Dunning, & Kruger, 2008), and laboratory technicians taking an exam about medical lab procedures and knowledge (Haun, Zerinque, Leach, & Foley, 2000). In all cases, top to bottom performers provide self-evaluations along percentile scales that largely replicate (Fig. 5.2).. The term "most" is implied but not explicitly spelled out. I reformulated it to be on the safe side. Phlsph7 ( talk) 12:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
If done afterward, the participants receive no independent clues during the performance as to how well they did- I haven't read this source; is this stated as absolutely in the source? I'd imagine, for example, that if it was face to face, there could be some unconscious clues.
...no feedback is delivered during the quiz itself..... You are probably right that an interviewer may inadvertently give away clues. But if that had a significant impact then it would spoil the measurement. If the formulation is a problem, we could change it to "should receive no independent clues". Phlsph7 ( talk) 12:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Explanations
The metacognitive lack may hinder some people from becoming better by hiding their flaws from them.- no issues.
Practical significance
Ehrlinger et al. 2008, pp. 98鈥121.- is it possible to be more specific about the relevant part of the source?
In 2000, Kruger and Dunning were awarded the satirical Ig Nobel Prize- no issues.
Lead
Sources
General comments