Psyfield

    简 繁

    Topics

    All terms About

    Dunning–Kruger effect

    邓宁-克鲁格效应

    Phenomenon
    Also called
    Dunning-Kruger effect, unskilled and unaware

    The Dunning–Kruger effect is the finding that people who perform poorly on a task tend to overestimate their ability and score by a wide margin, while top performers tend to underestimate theirs, by a smaller margin.[1][2]

    Self-estimates and actual ranks in the original study Actual score Estimated score 0 25 50 75 100 Percentile rank Logical reasoning Bottom quarter 12 62 Top quarter 86 68 Grammar Bottom quarter 10 61 Top quarter 89 70

    Data: Kruger and Dunning (1999), Studies 2 and 3. Only the bottom and top groups are shown, the values reported in the paper’s text.

    The original data: the lowest scorers overestimated themselves by a wide margin; the highest underestimated, by less. The viral “Mount Stupid” curve is not from this paper.
    The original data: the lowest scorers overestimated themselves by a wide margin; the highest underestimated, by less. The viral “Mount Stupid” curve is not from this paper. Save as image (PNG)

    Key points

    • In 1999 Justin Kruger and David Dunning tested Cornell undergraduates on humor, logical reasoning and grammar, then asked them to estimate their percentile rank.[1]
    • In the logical-reasoning study, the bottom quarter scored at the 12th percentile on average but placed their own score near the 62nd.[1]
    • The authors argued that low scorers lack the metacognitive skill needed to spot their own mistakes, while top scorers assume others did as well as they did.[1][2]
    • Later analyses showed that regression to the mean and the common better-than-average bias can produce much of the same pattern, so the effect’s true size is debated.[3][4]

    An example

    Lin takes a spreadsheet quiz at work and expects to land in the top 40 percent. She ends up in the bottom 20 percent. The questions she got wrong without noticing are the same gaps that kept her from judging her own score.

    Misreadings and limits

    The viral “Mount Stupid” curve, with a peak of confidence, a valley of despair and a slope of enlightenment, is not from the paper. The study compared self-estimates with actual ranks across four score groups; in the logic and grammar studies, top scorers still rated themselves above bottom scorers.[1]

    Sources

    1. 1 Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121
    2. 2 陈彦君, 石伟, & 应虎 (2013). 能力的自我评价偏差：邓宁-克鲁格效应. 心理科学进展, 21(12), 2204–2213. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.02204
    3. 3 Gignac, G. E., & Zajenkowski, M. (2020). The Dunning-Kruger effect is (mostly) a statistical artefact: Valid approaches to testing the hypothesis with individual differences data. Intelligence, 80, Article 101449. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2020.101449
    4. 4 Nuhfer, E., Fleisher, S., Cogan, C., Wirth, K., & Gaze, E. (2017). How random noise and a graphical convention subverted behavioral scientists' explanations of self-assessment data: Numeracy underlies better alternatives. Numeracy, 10(1), Article 4. doi:10.5038/1936-4660.10.1.4

    Last checked against sources: October 26, 2026