Showing posts sorted by relevance for query dunning. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query dunning. Sort by date Show all posts

Tuesday, January 8, 2019

Dunning-Kruger on the rise

The Washington Post reports on the Dunning-Kruger effect:

During the election and in the months after the presidential inauguration, interest in the Dunning-Kruger effect surged. Google searches for “dunning kruger” peaked in May 2017, according to Google Trends, and has remained high since then. Attention spent on the Dunning-Kruger Effect Wikipedia entry has skyrocketed since late 2015.
I learned about the Dunning-Kruger effect in 2010 from a David Pescovitz post to Boing Boing. D-K helped me understand so much about the perspectives of students with serious writing deficits. In October 2016 I came up with the name Dunning K. Trump.

I don’t know what it means that an article about the Dunning-Kruger effect has an error in subject-verb agreement. Did you catch it in the excerpt?

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts

Thursday, May 20, 2010

The Dunning-Kruger effect

David Pescovitz posted at Boing Boing last week on the Dunning-Kruger effect, which accounts for a curious relationship between incompetence and confidence. From the abstract of a 1999 paper by Cornell psychology professor David A. Dunning and (then) graduate student Justin Kruger:

People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it.
The Dunning-Kruger effect helps to explain why students with serious writing deficits can often have wildly inflated opinions of their abilities (and thus regard as “nitpicky” someone who points out run-on sentences and tangled syntax). Dunning-Kruger also helps to explain why the students who worry most about their competence are usually those with genuinely strong skills.

And Dunning-Kruger helps me understand my unease about recommendation forms that ask for an appraisal of student self-confidence. Instead of answering, I write “A high level of self-confidence is not necessarily a good thing.” Maybe now I’ll just write “See Dunning and Kruger (1999).”

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Dunning K. Trump

The Dunning-Kruger effect has interested me since I wrote a short post about it in 2010. Dunning-Kruger helped explain something I had noticed in teaching: that students with serious deficits often have wildly inflated opinions about their ability. According to Dunning-Kruger, a lack of competence entails an inability to recognize one’s lack of competence.

Watching the presidential debate last night left me convinced that Donald Trump is, among other things, a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect. He has no understanding of how government works, no grasp of how military strategy works, and he has no understanding that he lacks an understanding. Thus his ludicrous assertions: that Hillary Clinton should have changed the tax system (at some point during her “thirty years” in government), that the United States military needs to employ “the element of surprise.” In the second debate he called for “a sneak attack.” A sneak attack! That sounds like the suggestion of a bright third-grader.

And Trump has no understanding that he lacks an understanding of how his words might sound to anyone not already allied with him. “Nobody has more respect for women than I do,” he declared last night. And audience members laughed. I’m reminded of the story of a Hollywood mogul declaring, “I’ve got more class than any son of a bitch in the room.” Or words to that effect.

A related post
Steve Bushakis and Donald Trump

Monday, June 21, 2010

Errol Morris and David Dunning

There have been many psychological studies that tell us what we see and what we hear is shaped by our preferences, our wishes, our fears, our desires and so forth. We literally see the world the way we want to see it. But the Dunning-Kruger effect suggests that there is a problem beyond that. Even if you are just the most honest, impartial person that you could be, you would still have a problem — namely, when your knowledge or expertise is imperfect, you really don’t know it. Left to your own devices, you just don’t know it. We’re not very good at knowing what we don’t know.
Errol Morris talks with David Dunning about the Dunning-Kruger effect and “unknown unknowns”:

The Anosognosic’s Dilemma (New York Times)

A related post
The Dunning-Kruger effect

Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Dunning on Dunning-Kruger

The April 22 This American Life episode “In Defense of Ignorance” has a segment in which David Dunning talks about the Dunning-Kruger effect (beginning at 28:58). The classroom stories will ring a bell for any teacher.

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts (Pinboard)

[And now only two TAL episodes in my podcast backlog.]

Thursday, August 2, 2018

Dunning-Kruger geography

Our president, freestyling:

“I have great respect for the U.K. United Kingdom. Great respect. People call it Britain. They call it Great Britain. They call it — they used to call it England, different parts.”
From Garner’s Modern English Usage:
Great Britain consists of England, Scotland, and Wales — all three on the island known to the Romans as Britannia. (Modern usage routinely shortens the name to Britain.) It differs from United Kingdom, which also includes Northern Ireland.

Some people wrongly think of Great Britain as a boastful name. But it’s not: it’s rooted in history. Great Britain was once contrasted with Little Britain (or simply Brittany), in France, where the Celtic Bretons lived. Although the OED’s last citation for Little Britain dates from 1622, the term Great Britain has persisted (though perhaps not without a sense of pride).
Don’t get me started on the Channel Islands, the Crown Dependencies, and the difference between the British Islands and the British Isles. So many parts!

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts

[The Dunning-Kruger effect: a lack of competence entails an inability to recognize one’s lack of competence.]

Wednesday, October 11, 2017

A Dunning-Kruger moment

From today’s Vanity Fair piece about Donald Trump’s presidency:

Several months ago, according to two sources with knowledge of the conversation, former chief strategist Steve Bannon told Trump that the risk to his presidency wasn’t impeachment, but the 25th Amendment — the provision by which a majority of the Cabinet can vote to remove the president. When Bannon mentioned the 25th Amendment, Trump said, “What’s that?”
Related posts
The Dunning-Kruger effect
Dunning K. Trump
Frederick who?
Ties, misspellings, typos

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

The De Palma-Dunning-Kruger effect

From the Taxi episode “The Ten Percent Solution,“ first aired January 7, 1981. Louie De Palma (Danny DeVito) to Tony Banta (Tony Danza):

“Banta, sometimes I wish you were smarter, just so you’d know how dumb you are.”
Almost nineteen years before the 1999 paper that introduced the Dunning-Kruger effect, Louie (or, really, the episode’s writer, Pat Allee) was on the right track.

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts

Wednesday, September 9, 2020

A reminder

I was out doing errands this morning. I came home to the news. The news. The news. And now I want to repost this image, which I first posted on May 15:



And to preserve the asterisk, which signifies impeached and carries a bonus Kurt Vonnegut overtone:


[Click either image for a larger view.]

Donald Trump*’s revelations to Bob Woodward are further evidence of the Dunning-Kruger effect at work, made worse by dementia. What did Trump* think Woodward was going to make of these revelations? And how did Trump* think people would respond?

Richard Nixon at least had cunning enough to keep his tapes under wraps, at least until he couldn’t.

*

Yep, Dunning-Kruger. From Kaitlin Collins (CNN):

One reason Trump was so irritated aides didn't tell him about Woodward’s attempts to interview him for his last book [Fear ] was because he thought he could have made himself look better in it.
And from Maggie Haberman (The New York Times):
Mr. Trump gave Mr. Woodward extensive access to his White House and to top officials in the hopes the eventual book would be “positive,” in his eyes. Mr. Trump did not speak to Mr. Woodward for his first book on the Trump presidency, Fear, and the president has maintained publicly and to advisers that it would have turned out better had he personally participated.

Friday, April 5, 2019

Dunning-Kruger Montaigne

From Montaigne, “Of Presumption” (1580):

It is commonly said that good sense is the gift Nature has distributed most fairly among us, for there is no one who is unsatisfied with the share he has been allowed — and isn’t that reasonable enough? For whoever saw beyond this would be beyond his sight. I think my opinions are good and sound, but who does not think the same of his own?

Quoted in Ward Farnsworth’s The Practicing Stoic: A Philosophical User’s Manual (Boston: David R. Godine, 2018). Adapted from an unidentified public-domain translation.
Farnsworth’s gloss: “Our limited capacities prevent us from perceiving our limited capacities.”

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts (Pinboard)

Thursday, June 7, 2018

Be prepared (?)

““I think I’m very well prepared. I don’t think I have to prepare very much”: Dunning K. Trump, commenting on his upcoming meeting with Kim Jong-un. Yeah, you got this.

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts

Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Nancy Dunning-Kruger

[Nancy, December 29, 2020.]

For a better 2021, read Nancy every day.

Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts and Nancy posts (Pinboard)

Saturday, March 7, 2020

Dunning K. Trump*

Donald Trump*, speaking for the cameras about the coronavirus yesterday:

“I like this stuff. You know, my uncle was a great person, he was at MIT. He taught at MIT for I think like a record number of years. He was a great super-genius, Doctor John Trump. I like this stuff. I really get it. People are surprised that I understand it. Every one of the doctors said, ‘How do you know so much about this?’ Maybe I have a natural ability. Maybe I should have done that instead of running for president.”
Related reading
All OCA Dunning-Kruger posts

[My transcription. John G. Trump was at MIT from 1936 to 1973. A long run, but hardly “a record number of years.”]

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

“Rewording”

A surprising number of college students are devoted to what they call “rewording”: the practice of taking a passage from someone else’s writing and, uh, rewording it, without attribution. More surprising is that many such students see nothing wrong with this practice. More surprising still is that some of their professors see nothing wrong with it either and even encourage it. I suspect that the Dunning-Kruger effect is at work here: such professors must lack the competence to understand that what they’re encouraging is in fact plagiarism.

There are many authoritative explanations in print of paraphrase, plagiarism, and the inappropriateness of rewording without attribution. Here’s an excerpt from a helpful online explanation, from the Writing Center at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill:

What About Paraphrasing?

Paraphrasing means taking another person’s ideas and putting those ideas in your own words. Paraphrasing does NOT mean changing a word or two in someone else’s sentence, changing the sentence structure while maintaining the original words, or changing a few words to synonyms. If you are tempted to rearrange a sentence in any of these ways, you are writing too close to the original. That’s plagiarizing, not paraphrasing.

Paraphrasing is a fine way to use another person’s ideas to support your argument as long as you attribute the material to the author and cite the source in the text at the end of the sentence. In order to make sure you are paraphrasing in the first place, take notes from your reading with the book closed. Doing so will make it easier to put the ideas in your own words. When you are unsure if you are writing too close to the original, check with your instructor BEFORE you turn in the paper for a grade. So, just to be clear—do you need to cite when you paraphrase? Yes, you do!

Plagiarism (The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
When I talk with students about these matters, I always point out that no matter what they’ve been told, “rewording” without attribution is plagiarism, though perhaps in a hapless and unsophisticated form. Imagine getting an F for a paper or a course without even realizing that you’re engaging in academic misconduct. That’s the Dunning-Kruger effect with a vengeance. Yipes.

Related posts
“Local Norms” and “‘organic’ attribution” (writing without quotation marks)
Old and unimproved (“How to e-mail a professor,” “reworded”)

[My knowledge of “rewording” comes from many conversations over many years with students who have studied in many different institutions. My syllabi and other course materials make clear that “rewording” is a no-no.]

Wednesday, February 1, 2017

Frederick who?


[Video accompanying the New York Times article “Trump’s Black History Talk: From Douglass to Media Bias and Crime.”]

Our president honors Black History Month: “They’re incredible people.” And: “You read all about Dr. Martin Luther King a week ago, when somebody said I took the statue out of my office.” And: “Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I notice.”

Does Dunning K. Trump think Frederick Douglass is a living human being? Does he have any idea what Frederick Douglass is known for? And how would Trump have noticed that Douglass “is being recognized more and more”? What’s he even talking about? Like a student who hasn’t prepared for the test, our president is faking it — with no idea how obvious his fakery is. (That’s the Dunning K. part.)

Nothing about this presidency is normal. And nothing about this presidency is for getting used to.

*

February 2: Sean Spicer also appears not to know who Frederick Douglass was. Or if Spicer does know, he’s playing along with the boss. “Frederick Douglass” now has a Twitter account.

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

Things to do on Tuesday

I don’t plan to watch Dunning K. Trump’s State of the Union address tonight — I have to wash my hair, or something. I will be very busy. But I do plan to watch the Democratic response, to be delivered by Massachusetts Congressman Joseph P. Kennedy III. He represents Brookline and Newton, among other places. (Represent!)

I’m following Daughter Number Three in calling the president by a name of my own invention. I made up the name Dunning K. Trump in October 2016. This post explains.

Friday, March 31, 2017

Ignorant of ignorance

In The New York Times, Thomas B. Edsall writes about what can happen “when the president is ignorant of his own ignorance.” The term missing from this piece: Dunning-Kruger effect.

A related post
Dunning K. Trump

Monday, July 24, 2017

Another take on Jared Kushner

Jennifer Rubin, also writing in The Washington Post:

If not evidence of malicious deception, the story reveals a young man who is in over his head and out of his depth to such a degree that he does not know he is in over his head and out of his depth.
A Dunning-Kruger defense. The Dunning-Kruger effect is the subject of a number of OCA posts.

[Did you know that a .mil, .gov., or .edu e-mail address gets you a free subscription to The Washington Post ?]

Tuesday, January 21, 2025

Twelve movies

[One to four stars. Four sentences each. No spoilers. Sources: AMC, Criterion Channel, Netflix, TCM, YouTube.]

The Sleeping Tiger (dir. Joseph Losey, 1954). “We’ve never had a criminal for a houseguest — at least one we knew about.” A daft premise: prison psychiatrist Clive Edmonds (Alexander Knox) takes in the man who tried to mug him, Frank Clemmons (Dirk Bogarde), for a six-month effort at rehabilitation. Clive’s wife, Glenda (Alexis Smith), left to her own devices as her schlubby husband is off to give one lecture after another, is increasingly drawn to this young, pompadoured, rather brutal stranger, one already possessed of a rich criminal record. A sudden, unconvincing plot turn keeps me from giving the movie four stars, but Smith gives a great performance as a self-abasing, emotionally starved mess. ★★★ (YT)

*

Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants (dir. David Mamet, 1996). A filmed version of Ricky Jay’s Broadway show. An amazing performance of card tricks, card throwing, and sleight of hand, enhanced with learned patter. To watch Ricky Jay in action is to be transported to a Steven Millhauser-like world in which things happen that are beyond explanation. When someone like Ricky Jay leaves us, I think about all the knowledge that goes with that person. ★★★★ (YT)

[Watch it while it’s there.]

*

Maestra (dir. Maggie Contreras, 1023). A documentary about La Maestra, an international competition, held in Paris, for female orchestral conductors. From 250 entrants, fourteen are chosen; then five; and finally one. The most interesting story, to my mind: that of a French émigré, now teaching in Iowa, who finds herself confronting the painful family life she left behind. What would help offset the unvarying narrative movement (conducting followed by eliminations): greater exploration of the sexism that the competitors themselves talk about — for instance, the suggestion, even at La Maestra, that one competitor should smile more. ★★★ (N)

*

Shadow in the Sky (dir. Fred M. Wilcox, 1952). An oddly low-key treatment of combat-induced PTSD. Ralph Meeker plays Burt, a veteran receiving long-term care in a VA hospital. Nancy Davis is his sister; James Whitmore, his brother-in-law; Jean Hagen, a sympathetic nurse. Burt is tormented by rain, and a moment of crisis forces him to overcome his fear. ★★★ (TCM)

*

Love Actually (dir. Richard Curtis, 2003). It’s a Christmas movie and feel-good movie, with a huge cast and slightly bewildering network of relationships, familial, romantic, friendly, work-related. The comic bits are genuinely funny; the moving moments are genuinely moving; the corny moments are painfully corny. And the plotting is delightfully intricately, with everything coming together in an airport. Stealing the movie: Billy Nighy as a dissolute rocker looking for a comeback with a Christmas refashioning of the Troggs’ “Love Is All Around.” ★★★ (AMC)

*

Footsteps in the Dark (dir. Lloyd Bacon, 1941). A harmless murder-mystery comedy, with Errol Flynn as Francis Warren, an investment counselor who secretly writes mystery novels as F.X. Pettijohn. When a prospective (and sketchy) client is murdered, Warren turns amateur detective to find the killer, consorting with burlesque dancer Blondie White (Lee Patrick), staying out all night (“board meeting”), and arousing his wife’s (Brenda Marshall) and mother-in-law’s (Lucile Watson) suspicions. I have no interest in swashbucklers, but I like Flynn in this comic role, lobbing stock compliments to his tart-tongued mother-in-law and impersonating a Texas oilman to impress Blondie. With Ralph Bellamy, William Frawley, Alan Hale, Allen Jenkins, Roscoe Karns, and several actors from the second half of the alphabet. ★★★ (TCM)

*

From the Criterion Channel feature Cast Aginst Type: Heroes as Villains

The Velvet Touch (dir. Jack Gage, 1948). Valerie Stanton (Rosalind Russell) is a Broadway star famed for performances in light comedies — five smash hits in a row — but she wants to branch out and play Hedda Gabler (and think of it: here’s a Hollywood picture that assumes an audience’s at least glancing familiarity with Ibsen). Miss Stanton’s producer and one-time lover Gordon Dunning (Leon Ames) wants to keep his star in comedy, and threatens to reveal an ugly history to her new lover if she doesn’t comply — and within the first few minutes of the story, he’s dead, and the movie turns to flashbacks. A brilliantly filmed ultra-opulent noir, with great sets (that library!) and great music (by Leigh Harline), and sharp All About Eve-like dialogue (by Leo Rosten). With Leo Genn, Claire Trevor, and Sydney Greenstreet as Captain Danbury, looking backward to Inspector Bucket and forward to Lieutenant Columbo. ★★★★

*

Immediate Family (dir. Denny Tedesco, 2022). From the director of The Wrecking Crew, a warmhearted documentary about four session musicians whose names you’ve likely seen on some album’s back cover: guitarists Danny “Kootch” Kortchmar and Waddy Wachtel, bassist Leland Sklar, and drummer Russ Kunkel. Many great stories of dumb luck (right place, right time) and life on the road, though there’s almost no discussion of how a life in music impacts one’s obligations to one’s own immediate family. The greater reason I’d fault this documentary: coming in at 1:42, it’s too long, with too many professions of mutual admiration and too many details better left to Wikipedia articles or a website for the movie. I don’t need to know, for instance, that one of these guys produced six albums — one, two, three, four, five, six — for Jimmy Buffett. ★★★ (N)

*

Stakeout on Dope Street (dir. Irvin Kershner, 1958). A trio of teenaged boys find a briefcase holding a two-pound can of white powder, and when they figure out what they’ve found, they’re determined to cash in — and so are criminals whose briefcase is missing. I thought I was going to see a piece of lurid dreck, but I found instead a well-made Dragnet-style B movie, with a strong script, capable unknown actors, and surprising camerawork (that bowling ball). Best scene: a long flashback in which heroin addict Danny (Allen Kramer) recounts an episode of withdrawal. A bonus: music by Richard Markowitz, performed by the Hollywood Chamber Jazz Group. ★★★★ (TCM)

*

The Walls of Jericho (dir. John M. Stahl, 1948). So many older melodramas now look like case studies of the dark triad — Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy — which might have been found even in the early 1900s in the county seat of Jericho, Kansas. Here we meet (among others) county attorney Dave Connors (Cornel Wilde) and his alcoholic wife Belle (Ann Dvorak), Dave’s old friend and newspaper publisher Tucker Wedge (Kirk Douglas) and his wife Algeria (Linda Darnell), “she-lawyer” Julia Norman (Anne Baxter), and young Marjorie Ransome (Colleen Townsend). One of these characters will seek to poison relationships between others, whatever the cost. Political rivalries, ugly gossip, the small-mindedness of life in a provincial place, and, yes, the dark triad. ★★★★ (YT)

*

The Proud and Profane (dir. George Seaton, 1956). And the dark triad can also be found in 1943, at an Allied military base in New Caledonia. William Holden is Colonel Black (his first name, Colin, surfaces very late in the story), a rigid, domineering Marine, a wildly dishonest commander of men and women. Deborah Kerr is Lee Ashley, widow of a Marine killed at Guadalcanal, here as a Red Cross volunteer. Their relationship swerves into a mightmare of toxic behavior, and the story jumps several sharks before losing its balance, falling into the ocean, and being eaten by one last shark — that is, plot twist. ★★ (YT)

*

Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl (dir. Merlin Crossingham and Nick Park, 2024). Wallace invents a smart gnome to do gardening (and bring in ££); the evil penguin Feathers McGraw (from The Wrong Trousers) reprograms the gnome from the zoo where he’s locked up; an army of evil gnomes takes shape; and chaos ensues. There are many wonderful small touches: a Brown Betty teapot, a Penguin paperback, a box of “Brown Flakes” (cereal), Feathers’s sardine can, and, again and again, the meanings communicated by the facial expressions of silent characters. But the story gets bogged down in a subplot about Inspector Mackintosh and Police Constable Mukherjee (reminiscent of Wicked Little Letters), and Wallace’s cheerful conclusion about automation and artificial intelligence — “I knew you would embrace technology in the end, lad” — seems weak tea in light of the havoc the gnomes have wrought. And speaking of gnomes: they’re kinda terrifying, and I’m not sure any child younger than maybe eight would feel at ease watching them as they march toward the audience. ★★★ (N)

Related reading
All OCA “twelve movies” posts (Pinboard)

Saturday, January 6, 2018

Stating the obvious

A “very stable genius” would not be tweeting in the pre-dawn. How do I know that? Because I’m, like, really smart.

A related post
Dunning K. Trump

[Context: here and here.]