Didn't even need to read the article before nodding in agreement.
Yeah, the result should surprise exactly no one, but I find it useful to keep in mind, as a tonic for my own ignorance.
I like the 34 questions (p 4 here: https://tinyurl.com/5hfk3fju ). Shame the answers are included, we could've had a quiz ourselves :)
Dunning - Kruger
surfing from there: Cognitive Reflection Test:
It's a pity they are all sums, because I'm lousy at sums. I had to google the answer to #1, and could then understand it. ...
... I could *cognate* that each question was written in such a way as to elicit a snap "obvious" answer, and that it would be wrong for all of them. #2 was actually easy. #3 was also easy if one said, wait, read this question properly.
In this surfing session I also encountered "the illusion of explanatory depth." We think we understand how common stuff works, but if asked to explain it in detail, we fail miserably --- from zippers to flush toilets.
This one has huge relevance to the audio world!
Here's a concept I met when I was a kid, demonstrated in the form of a radio quiz.
I think the "contestants" were medical students and the questions were quite technical. As well as an an answer, each person had to rate their level of confidence in their answer.
The winner was not necessarily the person who got the most answers right: it was the person who was most right in self-assessing their level of competence and confidence in their answer
I know I was 15 or under, because I can remember where I was. The idea stayed with me ever since
Separate names with a comma.