@Jonathan Lamothe What I meant is that people assume the Dunning-Kruger effect is real because they actually don't know any better, which is a behavior the Dunning-Kruger effect purported to demonstrate in test results vs individual confidence about these results. However the effect shows also in random data, which should disprove it. But people being confident in the existence of this effect actually gives it credence, albeit pragmatically, not statistically.
Jonathan Lamothe
in reply to Hypolite Petovan • •@Hypolite Petovan I am having difficulty parsing this sentence.
Are you alluding to the fact that people will tend to see patterns in random data and draw false conclusions from that perceived pattern?
Hypolite Petovan
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •