Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T18:19:52.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Ambiguity and Self-Evaluation: The Role of Idiosyncratic Trait Definitions in Self-Serving Assessments of Ability

from PART ONE - THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL EXTENSIONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

David Dunning
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology Cornell University
Judith A. Meyerowitz
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology Cornell University
Amy D. Holzberg
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology Cornell University
Thomas Gilovich
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Dale Griffin
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Daniel Kahneman
Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

When people are asked to evaluate their own abilities, the assessments they provide tend to be self-serving. Indeed, often the appraisals that people endorse appear to be favorable to a logically impossible degree.

Perhaps the most direct demonstration of self-serving appraisal is the above average effect. When asked to judge their own capacities and performances in a specific domain against those of their peers, people predominantly respond, “I'm above average.” The above average effect has been demonstrated in the realm of driving ability (Svenson, 1981), ethics (Baumhart, 1968), health (Larwood, 1978: Weinstein, 1980), and managerial skills (Larwood & Whittaker, 1977). The most extreme documentation of this phenomenon comes from a survey conducted by the College Board in 1976–1977 of 1 million high school students. When rating themselves vis-á-vis their peers, 70% rated themselves as above average in leadership ability, whereas only 2% judged themselves as below average. When considering athletic ability, 60% considered themselves above the median and only 6%, below. When asked to judge their ability to get along with others, all students rated themselves as at least average, 60% placed themselves in the top 10%, and 25% placed themselves in the top 1%. The extremity of the phenomenon in this particular survey might be chalked up to youthful exuberance, although the above average effect occurs even among older and more educated people.

Type
Chapter
Information
Heuristics and Biases
The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
, pp. 324 - 333
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×