I was such an over-eager kid, always confidently
raising my hand to answer every question.
Additionally through many experiences such as making
friends, interviewing for jobs, and playing sports, I have learned that
confidence is a crucial ingredient in order to succeed. Does this mean that I
have been blissfully unaware of my incompetence for years and still manage to
get by? I would certainly hope not! To answer this question I did some
investigation on what others thought about confidence and I stumbled upon a Ted
Talk given by Amy Cuddy.
In the first part of this video, she explains how posture
can affect confidence and thereby affect success – her statistics show that if
you are more confident you are more likely to get a job. This makes sense to me
in a realistic context, as there is so much competition for jobs because many
people are more than qualified and therefore it is natural that the person with
the extra sparkle, being confidence, would get the job. In the later portion of
this video, she explains how the phenomenon of “faking it till you make it,” or
in her words “faking it till you become it,” changed her life. She explains
that in order to become truly competent she had to fake her confidence because
she realized that confidence was a major component to success. Essentially
Cuddy deduces that confidence is not only a good characteristic but is a
necessary characteristic in order to succeed. So where do we draw the line
between naïve confidence and confidence for a reason? Is there even a line, or
have we all just become either Lloyd or Harry from Dumb and Dumber?
Perhaps there are simply many people who are competent and
confident. Maybe there are many people who know their incompetent and choose to
ignore this fact in order to seem confident to succeed in a society that
demands such. Personally, I have realized that I have select confidence. What I
mean is that I know, similarly to Socrates, that I know very little about the
world in every respect. However, I am confident in certain areas, like in my
ability analyze books or recite all the presidents of the United States. So far
my selective confidence has served me well. Therefore I deem the best approach
to life is knowing that you know (almost) nothing, but being confident in what
you do know. Thereby I suggest that the Dunning-Kruger effect has some flaws in
its logic. What do you guys think, is the Dunning-Kruger effect a steadfast
phenomenon?
Picture of children raising hands from: http://community.ashworthcollege.edu/groups/parents/blog
Ted talk by Amy Cuddy from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks-_Mh1QhMc
Picture of Dumb and Dumber from: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2979305728/tt0109686
Amy Cuddy link from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Cuddy
Hey Dante, nice post. I was kind of having the same crisis for a while after this lecture too!
ReplyDeleteI came to the conclusion that the Dunning-Kruger effect is an observable phenomenon, but is more of a general trend rather than a concrete fact. If you consider a job interview, an employer will heavily consider your intelligence (which is quantified in things such as your college GPA, standardized test scores, etc), but they also consider your behavior/ personality and the confidence that you exude. Basically my point is that if I was hiring a lawyer at my firm, I would choose the one who seems more confident in his/her own abilities.
I believe the Dunning-Kruger effect is more of a social generality than an actual scientific effect. To give it the scientific moniker of the word "effect" seems kind of stupid to me, because there is n quantifiable way to measure intelligence or confidence. I believe the Dunning-Kruger effect resonates with the following quote by Bertrand Russel, "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are so confident while the intelligent are full of doubt." My interpretation of the Dunning-Kruger effect is that, it's not necessarily true that the dumber you are, the more confident you are. I believe that less intelligent people don't care much for criticism, as they either ignore it, or dismiss it by claiming intelligence or superiority over the critic. Whereas more intelligent people are much more susceptible to criticism, because their beliefs are open to change due to reason.
Basically, confidence is good thing and does not necessarily indicate that one is stupid. I don't believe in the correlation that less intelligent people are more confident and vice-versa, but rather, that more intelligent people are less likely to be confident in themselves because they respond to criticism, unlike less intelligent people.
Dante, I really enjoyed reading your post and you bring up some interesting points. Confidence, like many other things, is funny in that some people are just born with it, but at the same time, people can develop it. It also tends to fluctuate depending on the circumstances and situations. For example, when in a comfortable environment or with close friends, you're generally more confident. On the other hand, someone who everyone may perceive as extremely confident can lose almost all of his or her confidence when placed in an uncomfortable atmosphere.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the Dunning-Kruger effect, I agree with what Nihir said in his comment. I think it's more of a social generality. It definitely does not always apply. For example, given that we're here at the University of Michigan, I'm sure we've all experienced being confident in a course that we believe we know very well and receiving an A in it. Additionally, I know many outstanding athletes that are also very confident.
I think an interesting thing you could've added to your post is bringing in cockiness to the equation. There can be a very fine line between confidence and cockiness, and I think it would be interesting to explore that and how that relates to the Dunning-Kuger effect.
Dante, I really enjoyed this post. I too was fascinated by the lecture on the Dunning-Kruger effect, and my eyes were opened to an entirely new concept I had previously never given thought to. Yes, going on with your post, the concept does seem counter intuitive, especially given all that we have learned about the importance of confidence in anything that has to do with our future. For example, I can almost hear my mom and dad telling me right now to be confident in my abilities, since that was always what was essential to succeeding. I can also hear teachers who repeatedly told me, "Be confident when you take a test," or "Don't second guess yourself." So, when I first heard the explanation of the Dunning-Kruger effect, I too shared your reaction: aren't we all supposed to be confident? Isn't that the key to intelligence? However, after further interpretation, I realized that this is not really what the Dunning-Kruger effect is all about.
ReplyDeleteThe Dunning-Kruger effect states that the more confident you are, the less intelligent you are, and vice versa, as you mentioned. I realized that the reason the less confident people are the more intelligent is that those who are less confident constantly question themselves, their own beliefs, and the beliefs of those around them in an attempt to gain a different insight. The most confident people of the world, according to the effect, don't bother questioning their own beliefs, and are therefore more "stupid" as a result. This effect actually ties into what we all already know about the world: questioning ideas, concepts, leaders, etc. will lead to a more intelligent citizenry, and as a result, better functioning society. If one is too confident and less willing to see the need for change in their own ideas or beliefs, then that can lead to ignorance, one of the potential evils in the world. So, I agree with Dunning-Kruger.
So, Dante, don't lose confidence! Confidence is a good thing, in moderation. You're intelligent, so take pride in that. Instead, remember the Dunning-Kruger effect and focus on ensuring that you are not too confident that you ignore the possibility of changing your beliefs, or that you count the beliefs of others out. Remain confident, but most importantly, stay modest, always remembering that, to put it bluntly, there could be, and probably is, a better idea out there that could make you, and others as a result, more intelligent.
I'm glad that the Dunning-Kruger effect has been messing with someone else's mind. I have also been getting quite paranoid. While I think there is a lot of truth behind the Dunning-Kruger theory, I also think that confidence means having the courage to try and share new methods and answers, whether these are right or wrong. Arrogance might be the attribute to worry over. If we assume we are correct and receive new ideas with a closed mind out of a sense of superiority, then we are in trouble of overestimating ourselves. I think the Dunning- Kruger effect originates in part from what Socrates discusses in the allegory of the cave. Many of us are hesitant to leave our perceptions on the cavern wall. We don't want to integrate the shadows that others see because we think we are looking beyond the cave at reality. If we can use our confidence to share our own perspectives and to hear the perspective of others, then we should all be raising our hands more often.
ReplyDelete