•  
  •  
 

Keywords

dual burden hypothesis, Dunning-Kruger effect, estimating random guessing, graphs, guessing, histograms, mathematical artifacts, measurement and testing, metacognition, multiple-choice tests, numeracy, numerical artifacts in graphs, numeracy in behavioral science, paired measures, probability, psychology, random guessing, rapid guessing, randomness in graphs, random number modeling, science literacy, Science Literacy Concept Inventory, science of psychology, self-assessment, simulated data

Abstract

We utilize concepts of numeracy including number sense, reading and interpreting graphs, basic probability and statistics, and reasoning to estimate guessing and verify our earlier findings on human self-assessment as replicable. Our field study employed a low-stakes paired measures assessment (11,229 scores from the validated Science Literacy Concept Inventory and postdicted global self-assessment ratings generated upon completion of the Inventory) in conjunction with a five-category taxonomy of self-assessment proficiency. We also simulated 11,229 random guessing responses, to model responses that disengaged, purely random-guessing participants should produce. At least 90% of participants sincerely engaged with the instruments of measure, self-assessed imperfectly but reasonably well, and exhibited equal tendencies to underestimate or overestimate their scores by modest amounts. Results contradict the prevalent claim that most people overestimate their actual abilities, with the least knowledgeable being grossly overconfident (ie, the Dunning-Kruger effect). In this study, disengaged, random guessers could account for nearly all participants who grossly overestimated. Confirming that significant numbers of low-scoring participants are aware of their poor performance removes support from the "dual-burden hypothesis," which states that low-scoring participants lack both the competence and metacognitive competence needed for accurate self-assessment. The amount of guessing in a populace does not attenuate the "effect," as claimed in recent psychology literature, but magnifies it. Studies of paired measures yielded a new understanding of guessing. The "effect" is better explained as an illusion produced by probability than as an accurate portrayal of human self-assessment.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.19.1.1479

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License

Additional Files
databaseforandomguesspaperfinal.xlsx (1476 kB)
Data used in this paper
Download

Supplemental Content

Share

COinS