What are your thoughts on the Dunning-Kruger effect and its influence on the American voter?

Well of course. Isn’t “Dunning-Kruger effect” just a fancy name-branded way of saying dumb people don’t know how dumb they are, and can’t even hear it and just get offended when you point it out to them? Or have I not educated myself on that topic well enough to know that I don’t know what I don’t know?

I would add too that most of both parties and most of the news media have lost so much integrity (both in terms of corruption and in terms of not even really trying to say true and accurate things that make real sense), that it has created a huge opportunity for people to BS and sound like a breath of fresh air, because they’re used to hearing a different flavor of BS, that fresh BS that disagrees with the usual BS sounds pretty good.

This is somewhat off-topic but I think we sometimes see a microcosm of it here on Fluther so yes, I do think it had an effect. And as @Zaku points out the fact that so many in the electorate rely on “fake news” (and think that’s what the other side is reading) is a big factor too. There are still people who feel we need to give Trump a chance to show what he can do when it has been patently clear who he is from day 1.

I don’t see any surprising revelations in this article. From the date of his appearance in the runup to the Presidency it was recognized that Trump’s popularity was footed primarily on the combination of widespread ignorance allied with profound discontent. Viewed objectively, there is no question that BOTH are required in large doses to settle on Trump. As to which takes priority, there’s no nailing it down. All of us have heard the excuse from those who should know better “ordinarily, I would never vote for this guy, BUT….”. To me, these folks miss the logical leap that a man garnering votes through making shit up is prone to transfer the approach to matters of governance.

Talk of the D-K effect makes me think of SmashTheState . . .

https://www.fluther.com/180309/why-has-fluther-gotten-dumber/

I actually miss smash.
There was not so much “love” for trump as there was hatred for Hillary and most of it was centered on the fact that she pretty much openly ignored Trumps voting base. The message there was clear so this really had little to do with Dunning-Kruger

The difference in the positions of the two candidates on the issues, was so stark you need look no further.

If you liked Obamacare and thought it was working, you voted for Hilary. If you thought it was failing and unaffordable, you voted for Trump.

If you thought the economy was growing and good, you voted for Hilary. If you thought it was stagnant and repressed, you voted for Trump.

If you you thought our foreign policy was working and the world becoming safer, you voted for Hilary. If you thought our foreign policy was failing and the world becoming more dangerous, you voted for Trump.

If you thought taxes were too low, you voted for Hilary. If you thought taxes were too high, you voted for Trump.

This election was not really very difficult to figure out. Every time the left gets an answer they don’t like they come up with some horse shit test to prove they are smarter than everyone else. If they really were smarter they’d be able to figure out why they lost.

If you actually took the time to read the article you would find that it discusses the fact that both, or all sides, do the same thing only with different bias’s. This was Pro or Anti Trump question, it was about ALL American voters.

But, I suppose what I am witnessing here is an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Sorry, the previous statement was supposed to say ” This was NOT a Pro or Anti Trump question, it was about ALL American voters.

Yes, I read the article. The basic premise is that Trump lied, Common Core is good, and Trump won because voters are stupid. Nothing beyond the same old talking points. Maybe we’re all witnessing the Dunning effect.

That article was was a petty attack on the intelligence of Trump voters.

While the article does reference Trump and Trump supporters in the title it is certainly not, as @ARE_you_kidding_me states ”...a petty attack on the intelligence of Trump voters.” It points out repeatedly that the D-K effect can effect the way all of us view a subject or action regardless of our political affiliation.

Do you just gloss over statements such those below and take it as a personal affront rather than viewing it as something worthy of consideration:

To be sure, well-informed voters accurately endorsed true statements about economic and social conditions in the U.S.—just as long as those statements agreed with their politics.

and

But both groups also endorsed falsehoods agreeable to their politics.

or

…it was the political lean of the fact that mattered much more than its truth-value in determining whether respondents believed it.

and

…endorsing partisan facts both true and false led to perceptions that one was an informed citizen

What about

…the key lesson of the Dunning-Kruger framework is that it applies to all of us, sooner or later. Each of us at some point reaches the limits of our expertise and knowledge. Those limits make our misjudgments that lie beyond those boundaries undetectable to us.

And

… if we find ourselves worried about the apparent gullibility of the Trump voter, which may be flamboyant and obvious, we should surely worry about our own naive political opinions that are likely to be more nuanced, subtle, and invisible—but perhaps no less consequential.

And @Jaxk I know you know better. Statements such as yours “The basic premise is that Trump lied, Common Core is good, and Trump won because voters are stupid. Nothing beyond the same old talking points.” Certainly make is appear that your mind was already made up before you even began and you have twisted the article to suit your own views or agenda.

Did you read it yourself?

This syndrome may well be the key to the Trump voter—and perhaps even to the man himself. Trump has served up numerous illustrative examples of the effect as he continues his confident audition to be leader of the free world even as he seems to lack crucial information about the job. In a December debate he appeared ignorant of what the nuclear triad is. Elsewhere, he has mused that Japan and South Korea should develop their own nuclear weapons—casually reversing decades of U.S. foreign policy.

Whenever I see Dunning-Kruger brought up it’s usually a pseudo-intellectual way of calling some group, person or belief stupid and only plays brief lip service to the actual phenomena.

I see the D-K effect all the time in young physicians just out of training.

It’s rampant among engineers too. To some extent we are all guilty of it.

At least with engineers you can check the math.

@Rarebear it’s true what people say about them, “those engineers think they know everything”

”....we are all guilty of it.” Is this not what I was trying to get across?

I suppose it’s difficult to discuss this without conflating ignorance and stupidity, though no one will dispute that there is a difference between the 2. I will cede @Jaxk ‘s point that snooty leftists got their “come-uppins” with Trump’s election. And yet it would be difficult to dispute Trump’s virtual “sole proprieterhip” over “low information” voters.

@rojo I believe you were but reading that article I felt it was more of a backhanded attack on Trumps voting base than it was a genuine synopsis of the D-K effect.

It is certainly no coincidence that every example and every question in this article is a shot at Trump. When the research is this slanted, it is difficult to read it as fair and balanced.

“And yet it would be difficult to dispute Trump’s virtual “sole proprieterhip” over “low information” voters”
I would not completely agree with this statement. For those working class poor worried about simply having a job you vote for the candidate that promises something that may improve the situation and not the one who was essentially ignoring you. I would not exactly call that dumb. To be even more precise many of them never expected his antics to continue after the election. Just because people have different values than you does not make them idiots. Believing that is the default case is well…likely the D-K effect rearing its ugly head.

Perhaps it is unfair to make assumptions about Trump voters, and I am absolutely slanted against the man. But it is in both the nature and viability of his promises, as well as the glaring warts on the man’s character that should matter for something. Even discounting those warts, “those working class poor worried about simply having a job” might consider their prospects for improvement from a man who never held a job and living in a gold plated building. I mean what clue was there in a campaign based on “I am the greatest” and a penchant for making shit up, that things would change upon the windbag’s election? I understsand desperation and the hope for change, but surely the signs were legible, and the ensuing turmoil more or less inevitable.

Even for a lot of those people Trump was a bitter pill. Also for some he was effectively used to burn down the political landscape. I must add that several I know who voted Trump thought that he would be brazen enough to get things done without dancing around stuff. They though he really was about bringing back the middle class. I mean I did not buy it but I can certainly see how many did. They’re not dumb people either. Another thing is that practically everyone else ran shitty campaigns, democrats and republicans alike.

So this must be a high information voter?

I think the article listed is nothing more than a poor attempt by the left to try turning a tide of support for Trump. It took the tact that if you support Trump you are an ignorant voter. Yet it is traditionally true that most poor, uneducated voters vote Democrat. I can’t help but remember the Howard Stern interviews where he went onto the street and asked Obama supporters what they thought of his positions on issues. The catch was that he took all of McCain’s stances and attributed them to Obama. He even asked what they thought about Obama choosing Sarah Palin as a running mate. Every one of the people loved it, as long as they thought Obama did it. Likewise, he attributed Obama stances to McCain and they hated them. All the This article does not even consider how its own logic applies to the big picture. In the end, I think Trump got elected for the same reason Obama was popular in 2008…Hope and Change. People are sick of the corruption and lack of support from our elected officials. They saw Trump as someone that at least was engaged, wasn’t part of the good old boy’s club, and someone that might actually change things.

I don’t see how this is some bit of new brilliance. Of course there are people who don’t realize they are missing information on a topic. Often we don’t know what we don’t know. Everyone does it a little, but certainly some people are more aware than others that they may not have complete information. I don’t think it’s just education level, I think some people are just not from a culture of questioning and research.

I think another huge reason why Trump won if you want to stay closer to why from a psychological standpoint he won, is, people who liked a lot of what he said ignored the stuff they didn’t like. It just didn’t matter. The left really wanted it to matter, but it didn’t. The left is guilty of similar in the past, just not quite so much to have to ignore.

Trump speaks their language that is spoken behind closed doors.

The media and politicians were condescending over and over again to Trump voters, and they were too ignorant to realize it would have the opposite effect they wanted. Maybe they need to study up more about psychology, and how people function.