Underconfidence and overconfidence are the Scylla and Charybdis of medical practice. Too much of the former and you will hesitate and overinvestigate; too much of the latter and you will misdiagnose and overtreat. Either way the patient suffers. The Dunning–Kruger effect supposedly predicts how good people are at self-assessment—those with little knowledge or competence overestimate their ability, while those who are highly competent underestimate it. However, although the reality of the effect has been widely accepted, several criticisms have been raised, including the small numbers studied, the problem of statistical regression to the mean, and the problem of the random noise that accompanies the measurement of self-assessment. In reality, although qualified experts are better at self-assessment than novices are, there is no strong tendency for individuals of all grades of competence to be overconfident in self-assessment and very few people (about 5%) are actually “unskilled and unaware of it,” as Kruger and Dunning originally put it. Underconfidence and overconfidence are the Scylla and Charybdis of medical practice. Too much of the former and you will hesitate and overinvestigate; too much of the latter and you will misdiagnose and overtreat. Either way the patient suffers. But how can you navigate the narrow channel between the two extremes? How good are you at assessing your own competence? In 1999 two psychologists, Justin Kruger and David Dunning, published the results of an experiment.1 What they found has become known, in the perverse way that these things sometimes happen, as the Dunning–Kruger effect. Kruger and Dunning measured how students performed in assessments of their sense of humour (n=65), logical reasoning ability (two studies, n=65 and n=140), and English grammar knowledge (n=84), and then asked them how well they thought they had performed. They then compared the subjective and objective assessments. They then divided …

中文翻译：

---

当我使用一个词时。. . . 过多的医疗保健——自我评估

缺乏自信和过度自信是医疗实践中的 Scylla 和 Charybdis。前者太多，你会犹豫和过度调查；后者太多，你会误诊和过度治疗。无论哪种方式，患者都会受苦。据推测，邓宁-克鲁格效应可以预测人们的自我评估能力——知识或能力不足的人会高估自己的能力，而能力强的人则会低估自己的能力。然而，尽管该效应的现实已被广泛接受，但也提出了一些批评，包括研究的小数、均值的统计回归问题以及伴随自我评估测量的随机噪声问题。实际上，虽然合格的专家比新手更擅长自我评估，正如克鲁格和邓宁最初所说的那样，所有能力等级的个人都没有对自我评估过度自信的强烈趋势，而且很少有人（约 5%）实际上“不熟练并且没有意识到这一点”。缺乏自信和过度自信是医疗实践中的 Scylla 和 Charybdis。前者太多，你会犹豫和过度调查；后者太多，你会误诊和过度治疗。无论哪种方式，患者都会受苦。但是，您如何才能在这两个极端之间的狭窄通道中航行呢？你在评估自己的能力方面有多好？1999 年，两位心理学家贾斯汀·克鲁格 (Justin Kruger) 和戴维·邓宁 ​​(David Dunning) 发表了一项实验的结果。1 他们的发现已经众所周知，这些事情有时会以反常的方式发生，即邓宁-克鲁格效应。克鲁格和邓宁测量了学生在幽默感（n=65）、逻辑推理能力（两项研究，n=65 和 n=140）和英语语法知识（n=84）方面的表现，然后询问他们他们认为自己的表现有多好。然后他们比较了主观和客观的评估。然后他们分开了……