incompetent often think highly of themselves

[BillChin]

We've all seen this in various forms.

from
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... N73840.DTL

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

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, 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,'' 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.

<snipped>

[cowtime]

Reminds me exactly of my son-in-law...................

[ErikT]

I'd comment on this thread, but it's beneath me.

[Tak_the_whistler]

(looks at himself)

hmmm....

Ignorance is indeed bliss

[Walden]

Walden looks up at ErikT. :roll:

[Wombat]

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.

I don't think that expanation works. If the competent know what is required for recognising competence since it is exactly what is required for being competent, why would they be insecure about their own performance?

Conversely, if those who aren't competent don't have what is required for recognising competence, wouldn't you expect an even distribution of attitudes between those who guessed wrong and have, or mistakenly think they have, the attributes they've wrongly identified, and those who guess wrong and know they lack those attributes or aren't sure?

Although I agree with the observation about the incompetent not realising it, it sounds like 'back to the drawing board' for the explanation.

[BillChin]

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.

I don't think that expanation works. If the competent know what is required for recognising competence since it is exactly what is required for being competent, why would they be insecure about their own performance?

Conversely, if those who aren't competent don't have what is required for recognising competence, wouldn't you expect an even distribution of attitudes between those who guessed wrong and have, or mistakenly think they have, the attributes they've wrongly identified, and those who guess wrong and know they lack those attributes or aren't sure?

Although I agree with the observation about the incompetent not realising it, it sounds like 'back to the drawing board' for the explanation.

Anecdotally, I remember taking a Chemistry final. My opinion was that it was a difficult exam, with many tough questions. A friend of mine thought it was incredibly easy and the questions were very simple. The effect noted by the researchers was present. My friend barely passed the exam and I got a decent grade. In the case of the exam, my friend could not see the complexity and identified the problems as easy ones. He didn't know enough to figure out that he didn't know enough In my opinion, my story matches the explanation offered by the researchers.

[Caj]

I don't think that expanation works. If the competent know what is required for recognising competence since it is exactly what is required for being competent, why would they be insecure about their own performance?

They aren't necessarily insecure; probably they just assume that the test they took wasn't too hard, so they underestimate how high they'd rank above others.

Caj

[I.D.10-t]

Is that why my fife playing seems to keep getting worse?
Just last year I thought I was an ok player. Now I don't!

[Jerry Freeman]

Sometimes it's helpful to refer to these four categories:

Conscious competent.

Knows what s/he's doing and understands how s/he does it. Such people tend to be effective as teachers and managers as well as in positions of personal responsibility because they can analyze and verbalize how things are done, and how they should/can be done effectively.

Unconscious competent.

Effective at what s/he does but doesn't understand how s/he does it. Such people can be very effective in positions of personal responsibility, but not in positions where they have to manage/evaluate/train others. They're "naturals" at what they do, but unable to transfer any of their skill to others or to the task of managing others.

Conscious incompetent.

Such people understand what they know and don't know, can and can't do. Such people can be effective in management and leadership positions as well as positions of personal responsibility because they will consult with others who have skills that complement theirs. They will learn what they need to know or delegate to those who do know.

Unconscious incompetent.

This is the loose cannon. Doesn't know that s/he doesn't know what s/he's doing. Dangerous in any position.

Best wishes,
Jerry

[peeplj]

This thread reminds me of the "Peter Principle:" in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.

I used to work at a hospital in Texarkana, and the employees had a saying that the hospital wouldn't fire an idiot. It seemed to be true, especially among the nurses: a nurse that couldn't competently handle working with patients, especially if they had a 4-year degree, would have a job created for them, and they'd wind up with a desk job, a title, and lots of time to stare out their window.

I asked one of the nursing supervisors about this, once, when I was working on a printer in her office; she was a competent nurse and was well respected, and we had talked often before, as her printer was well past its usable life but there was no money to replace it. She looked at me for a long second, walked over, shut the door to her office, and said in soft tones, "Well, the best way to be stuck doing patient care for the rest of your life is to be good at it. So there is an unspoken rule: don't be too good at it."

Those words, spoken softly, carried with them great bitterness; I think they came from someone who'd seen things she'd have rather not seen, and had seen them too many times.

I really didn't know what to say, so I finished fishing the paper out of her printer in silence.

She resigned from the hospital the next year, and I was sorry to see her go; I found out later she had left nursing entirely, and was back in school taking courses to become an accountant.

--James

[emmline]

Conscious incompetent.

Such people understand what they know and don't know, can and can't do. Such people can be effective in management and leadership positions as well as positions of personal responsibility because they will consult with others who have skills that complement theirs. They will learn what they need to know or delegate to those who do know.

Thanks JF, for naming me. I didn't realize this was a useful category to be in.

[meemtp]

It makes sense to me. Those who question their abilities will seek to learn more and improve. Those who don't will stagnate. I've seen it in the medical field where I work. New grads whether they be nurses, paramedics or doctors fall into this. Those who are the most nervous and feel less competent upon entering the field always seem to become the best providers. Those who think they are prepared for everything and know it all just from their schooling tend to be the lesser competent. Only one example, but it's an important one.

[Whistlin'Dixie]

Conscious incompetent.

Such people understand what they know and don't know, can and can't do. Such people can be effective in management and leadership positions as well as positions of personal responsibility because they will consult with others who have skills that complement theirs. They will learn what they need to know or delegate to those who do know.

Thanks JF, for naming me. I didn't realize this was a useful category to be in.

Hey, you've named me too! Now I can go in peace.....

M

[chas]

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.

I don't think that expanation works. If the competent know what is required for recognising competence since it is exactly what is required for being competent, why would they be insecure about their own performance?

Higher standards.