The Dunning-Kruger effect is, famously, a purported cognitive bias that leads people to overestimate their competence about something they know little about while, in contrast, increased competence leads to a more accurate self-assessment of an individual’s performance.
I would like to propose the existence of the Dunning-Dunning-Kruger-Kruger effect, a cognitive bias that leads people to overestimate the likely truth of something if it called a cognitive bias and, more and most importantly, if the cognitive bias that is being granted credence is one that should lead us to grant less credence to it if it is an actual cognitive bias.
As applied to its namesake, an individual who believes in the Dunning-Kruger effect but lacks sufficient competence in psychology... (read more)
Ohh maybe that's true if the Dunning-Krueger effect is true! I'm not confident that it is. That's as a result of me not having looked into the evidence for it, though, so I might need to update my view upon further reading.
If we should give credence though to some claim a witness, expert or otherwise, is making, I do wonder: if the Dunning-Krueger effect is true what the foundation for our assessment of the credibility of their witness testimony would be. I dont think we should simply believe purported experts on the basis of credentials, degrees, published papers, or any other marker of 'expertness,'; rather, belief should be granted on the basis... (read more)