So what we have here is some scientists trying to prove that the Dunning-Kruger effect doesn’t exist and instead they give us a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
> The irony is that the situation is actually reversed. In their seminal paper, Dunning and Kruger are the ones broadcasting their (statistical) incompetence by conflating autocorrelation for a psychological effect. In this light, the paper’s title may still be appropriate. It’s just that it was the authors (not the test subjects) who were ‘unskilled and unaware of it’.
