Are you as good at things as you think you are? How good are you at managing money? What about reading people's emotions? How healthy are you compared to other people you know? Are you better than average at grammar? Knowing how competent we are and how are skill stack up against other people's is more than a self-esteem boost. It helps us figure out when we can forge ahead on our own decisions and instincts and when we need, instead, to seek out advice. But psychological research suggests that we're not very good at evaluating ourselves accurately. In fact, we frequently overestimate our own abilities. Researchers have a name for this phenomena, the Dunning-Kruger effect. This effect explains why more than 100 studies have shown that people display illusory superiority. We judge ourselves as better than others to a degree that violates the laws of math. When software engineers at two companies were asked to rate their performance, 32% of the engineers at one company and 42% at the other put themselves in the top 5%. In another study, 88% of American drivers described themselves as having above average driving skills. These aren't isolated findings. On average, people tend to rate themselves better than most in disciplines ranging from health, leadership skills, ethics, and beyond. What's particularly interesting is that those with the least ability are often the most likely to overrate their skills to the greatest extent. People measurably poor at logical reasoning, grammar, financial knowledge, math, emotional intelligence, running medical lab tests, and chess all tend to rate their expertise almost as favorably as actual experts do. So who's most vulnerable to this delusion? Sadly, all of us because we all have pockets of incompetence we don't recognize. But why? When psychologists Dunning and Kruger first described the effect in 1999, they argued that people lacking knowledge and skill in particular areas suffer a double curse. First, they make mistakes and reach poor decisions. But second, those same knowledge gaps also prevent them from catching their errors. In other words, poor performers lack the very expertise needed to recognize how badly they're doing. For example, when the researchers studied participants in a college debate tournament, the bottom 25% of teams in preliminary rounds lost nearly four out of every five matches. But they thought they were winning almost 60%. WIthout a strong grasp of the rules of debate, the students simply couldn't recognize when or how often their arguments broke down. The Dunning-Kruger effect isn't a question of ego blinding us to our weaknesses. People usually do admit their deficits once they can spot them. In one study, students who had initially done badly on a logic quiz and then took a mini course on logic were quite willing to label their original performances as awful. That may be why people with a moderate amount of experience or expertise often have less confidence in their abilities. They know enough to know that there's a lot they don't know. Meanwhile, experts tend to be aware of just how knowledgeable they are. But they often make a different mistake: they assume that everyone else is knowledgeable, too. The result is that people, whether they're inept or highly skilled, are often caught in a bubble of inaccurate self-perception. When they're unskilled, they can't see their own faults. When they're exceptionally competent, they don't perceive how unusual their abilities are. So if the Dunning-Kruger effect is invisible to those experiencing it, what can you do to find out how good you actually are at various things? First, ask for feedback from other people, and consider it, even if it's hard to hear. Second, and more important, keep learning. The more knowledgeable we become, the less likely we are to have invisible holes in our competence. Perhaps it all boils down to that old proverb: When arguing with a fool, first make sure the other person isn't doing the same thing.
Jeste li toliko dobri koliko mislite? Koliko dobro raspolažete novcem? Kakvi ste u čitanju ljudskih emocija? Koliko ste zdravi u usporedbi s ostalima koje znate? Jeste li nadprosječni u gramatici? Znati koliko smo sposobni i kakve su naše vještine u usporedbi s drugima više je od običnog podizanja samopouzdanja. To nam pomaže shvatiti kad možemo nastaviti s odlukama i instinktima i kad, umjesto toga, trebamo potražiti savjet. No, psihološko istraživanje pokazuje da nismo naročito dobri u točnom prosuđivanju samih sebe. Zapravo, često precijenjujemo vlastite sposobnosti. Znanstvenici imaju naziv za ovaj fenomen, Dunning-Krugerov efekt. To objašnjava zašto je više od 100 studija pokazalo da ljudi posjeduju iluzornu superiornost. Sudimo sebi samima bolje nego ostalima do te mjere da to prkosi matematičkim zakonima. Kad su programeri dviju kompanija trebali ocijeniti svoj rad, 32% programera jedne kompanije i 42% druge stavili su se u prvih 5%. U drugoj studiji, 88% američkih vozača opisali su svoje vozačke sposobnosti kao nadprosječne. To nisu jedinstveni rezultati. U prosjeku, ljudi sebe ocjenjuju bolje nego ostale na različitim poljima - od zdravlja, vodstva, etike itd. Ono što je posebno zanimljivo je da najmanje sposobni ljudi često najviše precijenjuju svoje vještine. Ljudi koji su slabi u logičkom prosuđivanju, gramatici, financijskom znanju, matematici, emocionalnoj inteligenciji provođenju laboratorijskih testova i šahu svi ocjenjuju svoju stručnost gotovo jednako kao i pravi stručnjaci. Pa, tko je najpodložniji ovoj zabludi? Nažalost, svi mi jer svi imamo rupe u znanju i sposobnostima koje ne prepoznajemo. Ali zašto? Kad su psiholozi Dunning i Kruger prvi put 1999. godine opisali efekt, tvrdili su da ljudi s manjkom znanja i vještina u određenim područjima imaju dvostruko prokletstvo. Prvo, čine greške i donose loše odluke. Ali, drugo, te iste rupe u znanju ih sprječavaju da primijete svoje greške. Drugim riječima, oni sa slabijom izvedbom nemaju stručnost prepoznati koliko im loše ide. Primjerice, kad su znanstvenici proučavali sudionike u sveučilišnom debatnom turniru, posljednjih 25% timova u kvalifikacijskom krugu izgubilo je gotovo četiri od pet rundi. No, mislili su da su pobjeđivali gotovo 60%. Bez dobrog razumijevanja pravila debate, studenti jednostavno nisu mogli prepoznati kada ili koliko često su njihovi argumenti bili pobijeni. Dunning-Krugerov efekt nije pitanje ega koje nas sprječava da vidimo naše slabosti. Ljudi obično priznaju svoje nedostatke onda kad ih primijete. U jednoj studiji, studenti koji su prvotno imali loše rezultate na logičkom testu, a onda su sudjelovali na mini-tečaju iz logike, bili su poprilično spremni grozno ocijeniti svoje prve rezultate. Možda zato ljudi s osrednjim iskustvom ili stručnošću često imaju manje vjere u svoje sposobnosti. Imaju dovoljno pameti da znaju da postoji puno toga što ne znaju. Isto tako, stručnjaci su svjesni točno koliko su stručni. No, često čine drugačiju grešku: pretpostavljaju da su i svi ostali također stručni. Rezultat je da bez obzira koliko su ljudi nesposobni ili vješti, često se zateknu u vrtlogu netočnog samopoimanja. Ako su nevješti, ne vide vlastite greške. Ako su neobično kompetentni, ne doživljavaju svoje sposobnosti toliko nevjerojatnima. Pa, ako je Dunning-Krugerov efekt nevidljiv onima koji ga doživljavaju, što možete učiniti da biste saznali koliko ste zapravo dobri u nekim stvarima? Prvo, tražite povratnu informaciju i uzmite je u obzir, čak i ako vam ne paše. Drugo, još važnije, nastavite učiti. Što smo obrazovaniji, manje je vjerojatno da ćemo imati nevidljive rupe u svojim sposobnostima. Možda se sve svodi na onu staru poslovicu: Kad se svađate s budalom, prvo provjerite da i druga osoba ne čini to isto.