The Dunning-Kruger effect
The four stages of learning
Anosognosia
Dr. Vilayanur S. Ramachandra, a neurologist, was examining a condition called anosognosia, which typically results from damage to the right parietal lobe (the right hemisphere) of the brain. A patient with this syndrome is convinced that although they are paralysed on one half of their body, they are normal. So a patient asked to clap their hands together will wave their right hand in the air or clap it against their chest and will be convinced that it is functioning normally. When asked to tie their shoelaces (a task that is impossible to perform with one hand without considerable practice), they will persist at the task indefinitely.
This syndrome only occurs where the damage is to the right parietal lobe, which led Dr. Ramachandran to develop a theory as to its cause. He theorised that the left hemisphere of the brain is concerned with logic and working out causes and effects. For example, when you see a door you understand what it does and how it opens even if you have never seen that particular door before. You can deduce this from your experience with other, similar, doors. This is the function of the left hemisphere. On the other hand, the right hemisphere acts as what he called the ‘devil’s advocate’ (Milton Erickson used the term ‘Pattern Interrupt’ because it interrupts the patterns executed by the left hemisphere). This is the part of the brain that questions whether that particular pattern is appropriate and questions the relevance of the deductions of the left hemisphere. This allows you to adapt to changed situations.
In the case of the patient with anosognosia, the right hemisphere is damaged so even though the situation has changed (that is, the patient is paralysed in one half of their body) the inactive right hemisphere is unable to question the deductions of the left hemisphere, which has previously worked out that the body is able to function normally.
Dr. Ramachandran tried a strange experiment. He poured water into the left ear of the patient with anosognosia, which, for unknown reasons, stimulates the right hemisphere. For a short period the patient is able to act normally and is aware of their paralysis. When this wears off the patient reverts to the condition, even denying that they could ever have admitted to being paralysed.
This model of the brain corresponds precisely with the model described by Jill Bolte Taylor in her talk ‘My Stroke of Insight’:
The right hemisphere deals with being in the moment, the raw input from the senses as it were, whilst the left hemisphere forms patterns so we can learn from experience.
In an article in Newsweek magazine, professor E. Paul Torrance. Schwarzrock describes how since 1990, whilst IQ in children has been going up, the results of another test he gives for creativity has consistently been going down.
Developing the right brain
One thing that is not well understood in the West is the importance of game playing in young children. This stimulates the right hemisphere of the brain. Many parents push their children into sequential learning from an early age, which stimulates the left hemisphere. Children who have been taught in this way tend to be very intelligent, in the sense that they score well in IQ tests, but lack the ability to think laterally. Such people often become sceptics because having worked out (or had explained to them) a logical explanation of how something works, they are closed off to situations that are exceptions to these rules.
The ‘devil’s advocate’ is not performing properly as it was never developed in childhood.
Of course this is not confined to sceptics. Blind adherents of political parties, flat earthers or religious ideological extremists also fall into this category. Talking to these people can be as frustrating as talking to a person with anosognosia would be.
The left and right brained approach in children can also be described as following instructions (left hemisphere) and creating new ideas (right hemisphere). In the old days of traditional playing, a boy would play with a box which a fire engine, then it’s a house then he puts it over his head and he’s a robot. When Lego and Meccano first came out they were made of basic building pieces that a child would assemble to form various constructions. Nowadays, you buy a Leggo robot or bakery. These are, ironically, described as educational because children learn to follow instructions.
Computer games have contributed enormously to the decline in creative thinking. You are confined to the rules of the game. You can’t, quite literally, ‘think outside of the box.'
The four stages of learning
The four stages of learning have been described in many different ways but my own version of this is as follows:
Stage 1. You don’t know that you don’t know
In this stage you are so incompetent that you are unable to recognise your own inadequacies. Because you don’t realise that you know so little you are unable to be taught. You think you know it all.Stage 2. You know that you don’t know
You realise that you don’t know it all and you can start to learn.Stage 3. You don’t know that you know
At some period you come to stage where you become quite competent but don’t realise it. You know a lot but retain a humility and can still learn.Stage 4. You know that you know
Sometimes you move to a point where you know it all and you know you know it.
This process can be seen when you start a new job. At first it seems as if everything is unfamiliar to you. There are no patterns that have been established from experience. It may be that you think the patterns you have developed in the past apply to this new situation or you may attempt to apply previous patterns to a new situation where it is inappropriate. If you persist in using them and they don’t work you are effectively suffering from a form of anosognosia. This is stage one of the four stages of learning. Some people never develop beyond this stage.
After you have been in the job for a while you start to realise that maybe you are not as wonderful as you thought you were. You have moved onto stage two of the four stages. In this stage you start to establish new left-hemisphere patterns which you can apply. Sometimes situations arise where you find that the patterns you have established don’t work and you have to ask someone what you should do. You are establishing new patterns.
After some time the patterns that you have established work most of the time. You become good at your job but you still retain the ability to learn new patterns. You have moved into stage three.
In stage four and after using the left-brain patterns for too long, the right-brain atrophies. You lose the ability to think about things in a fresh way. You can’t be taught and if it sets in there is an arrogance. If the job moves on, as most jobs do nowadays, you effectively have moved from stage 4: you know that you know - to stage 1: you don’t know that you don’t know.
The Dunning-Kruger effect
Stage 1 has been called the Dunning-Kruger effect after to researchers who described in. But if there is an inability to recognise the lack of ability in oneself then it is easy to attribute this to someone else without realising it is actually you that has it. So how do we determine if we are the one’s who are actually ignorant?
In most jobs the process will either weed you out or you will move on to stage 2, where you are able to learn. Unfortunately some jobs nowadays are more concerned with political correctness than job skill and so they keep incompetent people on. In the US this is apparent in some government appointees.
If you are in a discussion with someone and they accuse you of this kind of ignorance then how do you know if it is you that is ignorant or is it them? If you are actually in an intelligent discussion then the reality of who is knowledgable will become apparent. One attribute of people with this lack of insight into their own limitations is that they will not engage in discussions. They will use name calling or latch onto some irrelevant point in order to reassure themselves that it is actually you that is stupid. It’s a common tactic in political discussions to say that so-and-so supports gay marriage, is anti-vax or they are a Trump supporter therefore they are so stupid that I don’t need to discuss with them. People will sometimes use racism or even religion as an excuse. For example: ‘He made some racist remark therefore I won’t talk to him’ or ‘He’s a Christian therefore it’s a waste of time attempting to have a discussion’.
Always question your assumptions.