Posted on Oct 15, 2019
The Dunning-Kruger Effect May Help Explain Trump's Support
418
12
8
2
2
0
Posted in these groups: 
Psychology
Office of the President (POTUS)
Psychology Office of the President (POTUS)
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
1
1
0
Amazing! While Trump supporters believe in the made-up TDS, they don't believe in the documented Dunning-Kruger effect...
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Someone needs to find this political knowledge test and post it on RP.
I would love to know how certain members would score on it.
I suspect some of our loudest and post prolific political commentators would not do as well as they would have us believe.
I would love to know how certain members would score on it.
I suspect some of our loudest and post prolific political commentators would not do as well as they would have us believe.
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SFC Thomas Foreman, 1SG (Join to see) - I wonder how many would cheat by googling answers in order to lie to themselves about how smart they are on politics.
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
1SG (Join to see) - Tough to say. I am all for having it done in a controlled environment (voluntarily of course).
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
1SG (Join to see) - Maybe this could be an RP moderated discussion, like when we have some General on here trying to sell his book.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
Interesting study. The Dunning-Kruger Effect has been well established in the psychology community. This study attempts to extrapolate the Dunning-Kruger Effect in the realm of political knowledge. The actual on-line survey questions used in this study are not included (SI not provided); however, the questions themselves were not the focus of the findings.
The study attempts to show that those who scored low on political knowledge overestimated their level of knowledge exacerbating the Dunning-Kruger effect.
"Respondents to both surveys completed a political knowledge quiz, which asked five questions
designed to tap knowledge of basic political institutions, awareness of current political
conditions, and ideological differentiation (e.g., Luskin, 1990). These questions were modeled
after standard knowledge batteries found in recent iterations of the American National Election
Study (American National Election Studies, 2016). See the SI for a closer examination of this
question battery. Following Prior, Sood, & Khanna (2015), a preamble first assuaged
respondents not to worry about their performance (while instructing them not to cheat): "Please
try to answer this Political Quiz to the best of your ability. There is NO penalty for incorrect
answers." Basic institutional knowledge was assessed using questions which asked respondents
to identify the number of years served by a Senator, as well as the name of the current Secretary
of Energy, from four possibilities. Ideological differentiation was assessed by asking respondents
to identify which party is more conservative on the issue of healthcare. Respondents were also
asked which political party currently controls the House of Representatives, and on which of four
different programs the Federal government spends the least. Together, these questions form an
additive scale of political knowledge which ranges from 0 to 5. See the SI for a more detailed
discussion."
The author acknowledges the pitfalls of on-line surveys as well as inconsistencies with his findings. I believe it is reasonable in the realm of political discourse to suggest that being uninformed leads to overconfidence which parallels the Dunning-Kruger Effect. However, implying that this phenomenon occurs at a higher rate among Republicans or Trump supporters displays the very bias the study attempts to evaluate.
http://www.iananson.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018-dunning-kruger.pdf
The study attempts to show that those who scored low on political knowledge overestimated their level of knowledge exacerbating the Dunning-Kruger effect.
"Respondents to both surveys completed a political knowledge quiz, which asked five questions
designed to tap knowledge of basic political institutions, awareness of current political
conditions, and ideological differentiation (e.g., Luskin, 1990). These questions were modeled
after standard knowledge batteries found in recent iterations of the American National Election
Study (American National Election Studies, 2016). See the SI for a closer examination of this
question battery. Following Prior, Sood, & Khanna (2015), a preamble first assuaged
respondents not to worry about their performance (while instructing them not to cheat): "Please
try to answer this Political Quiz to the best of your ability. There is NO penalty for incorrect
answers." Basic institutional knowledge was assessed using questions which asked respondents
to identify the number of years served by a Senator, as well as the name of the current Secretary
of Energy, from four possibilities. Ideological differentiation was assessed by asking respondents
to identify which party is more conservative on the issue of healthcare. Respondents were also
asked which political party currently controls the House of Representatives, and on which of four
different programs the Federal government spends the least. Together, these questions form an
additive scale of political knowledge which ranges from 0 to 5. See the SI for a more detailed
discussion."
The author acknowledges the pitfalls of on-line surveys as well as inconsistencies with his findings. I believe it is reasonable in the realm of political discourse to suggest that being uninformed leads to overconfidence which parallels the Dunning-Kruger Effect. However, implying that this phenomenon occurs at a higher rate among Republicans or Trump supporters displays the very bias the study attempts to evaluate.
http://www.iananson.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018-dunning-kruger.pdf
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google