The Dunning–Kruger (DK) effect is a cognitive bias in which individuals overestimate their abilities, leading to overconfidence and resistance to feedback. This study examines the DK effect among educators in higher education institutions in Saudi Arabia, focusing on the gap between educators’ self-assessments and student evaluations. The research found significant disparities between educators’ self-evaluations and student evaluations, indicating a pronounced DK effect. Educators rated their performance substantially higher than students, especially at the start and during the course. Differences between expatriate and Saudi educators were also notable with expatriate educators rating themselves more favourably than their local counterparts. Gender differences in self-assessment were minimal. The findings highlight the need for educational institutions to implement more comprehensive evaluation systems, incorporating peer reviews, student feedback and targeted self-assessment training. Such measures can help mitigate the DK effect, enabling educators to receive accurate feedback and engage in meaningful professional growth. The study’s results emphasize the importance of fostering a culture of continuous improvement and self-awareness among educators to enhance teaching effectiveness and improve student learning outcomes. Future research should explore the DK effect in diverse cultural and educational settings to validate these findings and expand our understanding of cognitive biases in professional development. Overall, this research underscores the critical role of addressing cognitive biases in performance evaluations and contributes valuable insights into the DK effect in the education sector.
AlanziA. A., SulpheyM. M., & JnaneswarK. (2022). Can knowledge of administrative law impact constructive deviance and task performance: Empirical evidence from Saudi Arabia. Vision: Journal of Business Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1177/09722629221117192
2.
Al KahtaniN. S., & SulpheyM. M. (2022). A study on how psychological capital, social capital, workplace wellbeing, and employee engagement relate to task performance. Sage Open, 12(April–June), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221095010
3.
BalzanR. P. (2016). Overconfidence in psychosis: The foundation of delusional conviction?Cogent Psychology, 3(1), 1135855. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2015.1135855
4.
BenzelE. (2022). Dunning–Kruger effect. World Neurosurgery, 160, xv. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2022.02.046
5.
Boeve-de PauwJ., OlssonD., BerglundT., & GerickeN. (2022). Teachers’ ESD self-efficacy and practices: A longitudinal study on the impact of teacher professional development. Environmental Education Research, 28(6), 867–885. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2042206
6.
BradleyC. S., DreifuerstK. T., JohnsonB. K., & LoomisA. (2022). More than a meme: The Dunning–Kruger effect as an opportunity for positive change in nursing education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 66, 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2022.02.010
7.
BuehlerR., GriffinD., & RossM. (1994). Exploring the “planning fallacy”: Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 366–381.
8.
BuehlerR., GriffinD., & RossM. (2002). Inside the planning fallacy: The causes and consequences of optimistic time predictions. In GilovichT., GriffinD., & KahnemanD. (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 251–270). Cambridge University Press.
9.
Christiansen-SzalanskiJ. J. J., & BushyheadJ. B. (1981). Physicians’ use of probabilistic information in a real clinical setting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 928–935.
10.
CooperA. C., WooC. Y., & DunkelbergW. C. (1988). Entrepreneurs’ perceived chances for success. Journal of Business Venturing, 3, 97–108.
11.
CrossP. (1977). Not can, but will college teaching be improved?New Directions for Higher Education, 17, 1–15.
12.
DunningD. (2005). Self-insight: Roadblocks and detours on the path to knowing thyself. Psychology Press.
13.
DunningD., GriffinD. W., MilojkovicJ. H., & RossL. (1990). The overconfidence effect in social prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 568–592.
14.
DunningD., HeathC., & SulsJ. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x
15.
DunningD., JohnsonK., EhrlingerJ., & KrugerJ. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83–86.
16.
DunningD., MeyerowitzJ. A., & HolzbergA. D. (1989). Ambiguity and self-evaluation: The role of idiosyncratic trait definitions in self-serving assessments of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1082–1090.
17.
DunningD., & StoryA. L. (1991). Depression, realism, and the overconfidence effect: Are the sadder wiser when predicting future actions and events?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 521–532.
18.
EhrlingerJ., JohnsonK., BannerM., DunningD., & KrugerJ. (2008). Why the unskilled are unaware? Further explorations of (lack of) self-insight among the incompetent. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 98–121.
19.
EpleyN., & DunningD. (2000). Feeling “holier than thou”: Are self-serving assessments produced by errors in self or social prediction?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 861–875. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.861
20.
FischhoffB., SlovicP., & LichtensteinS. (1977). Knowing with certainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 552–564.
21.
FreilingJ. (2019). Leadership concepts for diaspora entrepreneurship: What does management and organization theory offer? In EloM. & Minto-CoyI. (Eds.), Diaspora networks in international business (pp. 323–336). Springer.
22.
GaoG., LiY., LiuB., & ZhuangH. (2020). I thought I knew: The Dunning–Kruger effect in the principles of economics classes. Midwestern Business and Economic Review, 53(53), 24–38. https://hdl.handle.net/2022/27138
23.
GignacG. E. (2022). The association between objective and subjective financial literacy: Failure to observe the Dunning–Kruger effect. Personality and Individual Difference, 184, 111224.
24.
GignacG. E. (2024). Rethinking the Dunning–Kruger effect: Negligible influence on a limited segment of the population. Intelligence, 104, 101830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2024.101830
25.
GignacG. E., & ZajenkowskiM. (2023). Still no Dunning–Kruger effect: A reply to Hiller. Intelligence, 97, 101733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2023.101733
26.
HayesA. F., & DunningD. (1997). Construal processes and trait ambiguity: Implications for self-peer agreement in personality judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 664–677.
27.
JansenR. A., RaffertyA. N., & GriffithsT. L. (2021). A rational model of the Dunning–Kruger effect supports insensitivity to evidence in low performers. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 756–763. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01057-0
28.
KantS. S., TsurelC., & WrubleA. W. (2022). Comparing perceptions of nursing faculty and students to actual student performance in syringe measurement and use: An example of the Dunning–Kruger effect?Journal of Human Sciences, 19(3), 441–452.
29.
KrugerJ., & DunningD. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1121–1134.
30.
KrugerJ., & DunningD. (2002). Unskilled and unaware--but why? A reply to Krueger and Mueller (2002). Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 82(2), 189–192. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.2.189-192
31.
LebudaI., HoferG., RomingerC., & BenedekM. (2024). No strong support for a Dunning–Kruger effect in creativity: Analyses of self-assessment in absolute and relative terms. Scientific Reports, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-61042-1
32.
MazorM., & FlemingS. M. (2021). The Dunning–Kruger effect revisited. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 677–678. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01101-z
33.
MiddletonW., HarrisP., & SurmanM. (1996). Give ‘em enough rope: Perception of health and safety risks in bungee jumpers. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1996.15.1.68
34.
OdeanT. (1998). Volume, volatility, price, and profit when all traders are above average. Journal of Finance, 8, 1887–1934.
35.
OksamJ., KingmaJ., & KlasenH. J. (2000). Clinicians’ recognition of 10 different types of distal radial fractures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91, 917–924.
36.
PrattS., PanB., AgyeiwaahE., LeiS. S. I., LugosiP., KirillovaK., PiirmanM., SuttonJ. L., JönssonH. C., HaselwanterS., SmithR. P., SinhaR., BernoT., MackenzieM., GraciS., RaoY. V., VeliverronenaL., ZekanB., Suranga SilvaD. A. C., ... ParkS. (2024). Tourism myths and the Dunning–Kruger effect. Annals of Tourism Research, 104, 103620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2023.103620
37.
ProninE., LinD. Y., & RossL. (2002). The bias blind spot: Perceptions of bias in self versus others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202286008
38.
RahmaniM. (2020). Medical trainees and the Dunning–Kruger effect: When they don’t know what they don’t know. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 12(5), 532–534. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-20-00134.1
39.
RutterD. R., QuineL., & AlberyI. P. (1998). Perceptions of risk in motorcyclists: Unrealistic optimism, relative realism and predictions of behaviour. British Journal of Psychology, 89, 681–696.
40.
RyvkinD., KrajčM., & OrtmannA. (2012). Are the unskilled doomed to remain unaware?Journal of Economic Psychology, 33, 1012–1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.06.003
41.
SandhyaS., & SulpheyM. M. (2021). Influence of empowerment, psychological contract and employee engagement on voluntary turnover intentions. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 70(2), 325–349. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-04-2019-0189
42.
StänickeE., & McLeodJ. (2021). Paradoxical outcomes in psychotherapy: Theoretical perspectives, research agenda and practice implications. European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 23(2), 115–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642537.2021.1923050
43.
StoryA. L. (2003). Similarity of trait and construal and consensus in interpersonal perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 364–370.
44.
SulpheyM. M., & Al-KahtaniN. S. (2018). Academic excellence of business graduates through nudging: Prospects in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 24(1), 98–114. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2018.10013022
45.
SurdilovićD., AdtaniP., Ali FuoaS., AbdelaalH., & D’souzaJ. (2022). Evaluation of the Dunning–Kruger effects among dental students at an academic training institution in UAE. Acta Stomatologica Croatica, 56(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.15644/asc56/3/8
46.
UkoP. J., UkoM. P., & UtibeU. J. (2024). Assessing the impact of Dunning–Kruger effect on secondary school science teachers. International Journal of Education and Evaluation, 10(3), 149–159.
47.
ViolatoC., & LockyerJ. (2006). Self and peer assessment of pediatricians, psychiatrists and medicine specialists: Implications for self-directed learning. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11(3), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-005-5639-0
48.
WeinsteinN. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 806–820.
49.
WeinsteinR. S. (2002). Reaching higher: The power of expectations in schooling. Harvard University Press.
50.
Yang HansenK., ThorsenC., RadišićJ., PeixotoF., LaineA., & LiuX. (2024). When competence and confidence are at odds: A cross-country examination of the Dunning–Kruger effect. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39(2), 1537–1559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00804-x
