Revisiting the Dunning-Kruger Effect: Insights on Gender Differences
– by Anna Adamecz
The Dunning-Kruger Effect (DKE) is a well-documented psychological phenomenon stating that people with lower levels of the ability tend to self-assess their ability less accurately than people with relatively higher levels of the ability. There has been much debate as to whether this effect actually exists or is a statistical artefact. A recent study by Anna Adamecz, Radina Ilieva, and Nikki Shure provides new insights into this effect, particularly focusing on gender differences.
Understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect
First described by David Dunning and Justin Kruger in 1999, the Dunning-Kruger Effect posits that individuals with lower cognitive abilities are less capable of accurately assessing their own performance. This is because the skills required to perform a task well are often the same skills needed to evaluate one’s performance in that task. Consequently, low performers tend to overestimate their abilities, while high performers have a more realistic view of their competence.
New Research Findings
The study by Adamecz, Ilieva, and Shure revisits the DKE using data from the British Cohort Study 1970 (BCS70), which follows the lives of approximately 17,000 individuals born in the UK in a specific week in 1970. This nationally representative data set allows for a comprehensive analysis of cognitive abilities and self-assessments over time.
Key Findings:
- Existence of the DKE: The study confirms the presence of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Individuals with higher abilities indeed have more accurate self-assessments.
- Gender differences: A significant contribution of this study is the exploration of gender differences in the DKE. We found that while the DKE itself does not differ between genders, the direction of self-assessment bias does. The DKE comes from men relatively overestimating and women relatively underestimating their abilities.
- Implications for overconfidence and underconfidence: The findings suggest that overconfidence is more prevalent among men, while underconfidence is more common among women. This has important implications for educational and professional settings, where self-assessment biases can influence performance and decision-making.
Conclusion
This study not only replicates the existence of the Dunning-Kruger Effect using nationally representative data but also provides the first empirical examination of its heterogeneity by gender. The findings highlight the importance of addressing gender-specific self-assessment biases to improve self-awareness and performance in various contexts.
Understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect and its gender-specific nuances can help in developing targeted interventions to foster more accurate self-assessments. This, in turn, can lead to better educational and professional outcomes, reducing the impact of overconfidence and underconfidence on individual success.
Anna Adamecz, Radina Ilieva and Nikki Shure: Revisiting the Dunning-Kruger Effect: Composite Measures and Heterogeneity by Gender. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 2025. Doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2025.102362
