Trained as a social psychologist, Leiden University social psychologist Carsten de Dreu uses behavioral science, history, economics, archaeology, primatology and biology, among other disciplines to study the basis of conflict and cooperation among humans.
As a math professor who teaches students to use data to make informed decisions, I am familiar with common mistakes people make when dealing with numbers. The Dunning-Kruger effect is the idea that the least skilled people overestimate their abilities more than anyone else. This sounds convincing on the surface and makes for excellent comedy. But in a recent paper, my colleagues and I suggest that the mathematical approach used to show this effect may be incorrect.
Machine learning tools like chatbots and virtual assistants can emulate the work of psychologists and psychotherapists and are even helping to address people’s basic therapeutic needs.
The paper “The Nature and Organization of Individual Differences in Executive Functions: Four General Conclusions,” published in Current Directions in Psychological Science in 2012, is a recipient of Sage’s fourth annual 10-Year Impact Awards. The paper has been cited 2,172 times.
We are “less aware of the reasons for our choices than we think we are,” Petter Johansson and his partner Lars Hall have determined, and reasoning, as we call it, is often conducted post hoc.
Sales promotions usually list the discount before the restriction. But is this “good news then bad news” structure really the best practice?
Social psychologists David Dunning of the University of Michigan and Justin Kruger of New York University, whose research captured the public imagination by suggesting that unskilled people often overrate their own abilities, have received the 2023 University of Louisville Grawemeyer Award in Psychology.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect, explains David Dunning, comes when “people who are incompetent or unskilled or not expert in a field lack expertise to recognize that they lack expertise. So they come to conclusions, decisions, opinions that they think are just fine when they’re, well, wrong.”
The creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) has led to a heated debate on the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. Luciana Balboa, Elizabeth Gadd, Eva Mendez, Janne Pölönen, Karen Stroobants, Erzsebet Toth Cithra and the CoARA Steering Board address these arguments and state CoARA’s commitment to finding ways in which peer review and bibliometrics can be used together responsibly. Psychologists Jonathan St. B. T. Evans and Keith E. Stanovich have a history of publishing important research papers that resonate for years. Whether you’re in a research leadership position, working in research development, or a researcher embarking on their project, creating a culture of […] Title of course: Space/Power/Species What prompted the idea for the course? A few years ago, I came across the architect Joyce Hwang’s […] The slow, relentless creep of computing is currently in overdrive with powerful artificial intelligence tools impacting every aspect of our lives. What […] Philosophy has been instrumental to AI since its inception, and should still be an important contributor as artificial intelligence evolves..
EXPLORE
Impact
Research Assessment, Scientometrics, and Qualitative v. Quantitative Measures
READ MORE
Paper to Advance Debate on Dual-Process Theories Genuinely Advanced Debate
READ MORE
Webinar: Fundamentals of Research Impact
READ MORE
Innovation
This Anthropology Course Looks at Built Environment From Animal Perspective
READ MORE
2024 Henry and Bryna David Lecture: K-12 Education in the Age of AI
READ MORE
Philosophy Has Been – and Should Be – Integral to AI
READ MORE
